January 6, 2019

"I did not vote for Trump and have concerns about his behavior and policies, but I will not stand-up idly and condone what appears to be an effort to conduct a coup..."

"... and unseat a duly elected President. How so? I read and hear all the rhetoric about his misdeeds, but where is the meat? That he obviously lies. So? I recently read a study in which it was concluded that ALL presidents have lied to the public and knowingly did so. That Trump is more blatant in his lies and lies more often does not make him worse (or in need of impeachment) than his predecessors. Surely, you remember G.W. Bush and his justifications for invading Iraq and then blaming it (that his justifications were baseless) on 'bad intelligence'; those lies lead to the death of over 5,000 American military personnel, over 40,000 wounded and tens of thousands of Iraqi civilian (read: non-combatant) deaths and injuries. That Trump refuses to 'act' in a manner that the political elite demands is not grounds for impeachment. That Trump has and is inciting the tyranny of the masses is not grounds for impeachment. Again, I am not a big fan of Trump, but until hard proof is provided that he has committed high crimes and misdemeanors, I will support his presidency, even if I do not support one or more of is policies or agree with his behavior."

Writes one commenter, very aptly, on "The People vs. Donald J. Trump/He is demonstrably unfit for office. What are we waiting for?" by David Leonhardt (in the NYT).

235 comments:

1 – 200 of 235   Newer›   Newest»
rhhardin said...

He sees the structural problem but isn't great at reading Trump.

Darrell said...

The NYT is unfit to print.
That doesn't mean we'll burn it to the ground. Necessarily.

WisRich said...

Who's the bigger liar: Trump or the politicians who lied about wanting to implement the very policies they've advocated for for decades.

David Begley said...

I looked at the Articles of Impeachment filed in the last Congress by Al Green of Texas. A joke.

I can’t imagine serious people consider the firing of Comey to be obstruction of justice. Trump could fire every US Attorney and it would not be a crime. They are all political appointees!

The Left just throws out Impeachment and never backs it up with the actual high crimes and misdemeanors.

gilbar said...

Sandy O'Casey Cortez (AOC)'s supporters tweeted to Steve Scalise:
"snipe his ass"
and (referring to AOC)
“she’s got better aim than James Hodgkinson, that’s for sure,”

so, they're Not JUST advocating a coup; they're DEMANDING CIVIL WAR

iowan2 said...

Dems have always been style over substance.
Remember Obama? Where did he come from? A speech. A speech at the Democrat National Convention. Not anything he accomplished.
After he was in office, the talking heads were sure the next speech would change the Arc of History. Not a policy, a speech. Even his supporters knew he would not accomplish anything, thus lowering expectations to a speech.

MayBee said...

Good. At first I was hoping that was an excerpt the article by David Leonard. Alas. At least the commenter makes sense

gilbar said...

another iowan said about O'Bama... Not anything he accomplished.

to be fair to Barry O'Bama, One thing he DID accomplish was being a Very useful NCAA bracket help. . . All you had to do, was check your bracket against his: and remove any similarities

Francisco D said...

Didn't Trump conspire with Putin to win?

According to Inga and the usual suspects, Mueller is about to bring the hammer down. Trump will not only be impeached and removed from office, he will be convicted of treason and executed.

To appease the masses on which he has inflicted Hitler-like terror, his head will be placed on a pike outside the White House as a warning to future treasonous scum who would deprive Democrats of their God given right to rule.

Darrell said...

Anyone filing spurious impeachment charges should be summarily dismissed from gov't service by a simple up-and-down vote in the House and Senate.

This has to be nipped in the bud.

Hagar said...

"High crimes and misdemeanors" is a nebulous phrase, but one must assume the Convention had in mind offences related to the conduct of the President's office.

Thus President Clinton's perjury, though quite serious - it was directed at denying Paula Jones her petition for justice in a US court, not just saving his own sorry ass - was more of a low crime for which he should have been roundly condemned, prosecuted and fined, but not impeached.

The current search for something, anything, to impeach Trump for is still mostly about trying to "undo" the 2016 election.

David Begley said...

High crimes and misdemeanors is a legal standard although it is ultimately a political decision. That NYT piece is a complete embarrassment. Unhinged.

The author cites Fox News. He claims Trump dioes what Fox News suggests. Read the whole thing.

Darrell said...

Yeah. The Fox News run by Murdoch's left-wing sons.
Truthy is the Left.

rehajm said...

If it is lies they're worried about where's the outrage at the lefite lies which are repeated often enough they become accepted as truth?

They are quite selective in which lies they choose to address.

Obadiah said...

He makes a good point and immediately undermines it by citing W's decision to go into Iraq. There's no proof W lied about that. The accusation that he did has been repeated so often that now everyone assumes it to be true.

David Begley said...

David Leonhardt is a NYC native, Yale alum and Pulitzer winner. Clueless loser.

rehajm said...

High crimes and misdemeanors is a legal standard although it is ultimately a political decision.

Yes. They are whatever they say they are.

Chuck said...

Althouse, neither you nor that NYT commenter (who couold not properly spell "led")addressed the section of the Leonhardt column in which he opined that Trump has violated campaign finance law. Trump is "Individual 1" in the criminal information filed in regard to Michael Cohen in the Southern District of New York.

I think that (and other developments like it) is how this ends. Not in some opaque notion of "collusion" that the Trump cultists will reject no matter how broad the evidence, but rather in a series of alleged federal crimes that pile up like a list of bankrupt Trump businesses.

I think that the guy is dirty, and the Office of Special Counsel is going to ultimately show us with surgical precision just how dirty the guy is.

narciso said...

Well remember the audience this commenter is going for, Obama was not

Hagar said...

I have been thinking that what the West Coast governors seem to be working toward is undermining the Central Government itself, so that they eventually can call for a new constitutional convention to recognize a de facto situation of a return to something like the original Continental Congress.
This is not going to go over well with the "social democrats" seeking all power to be concentrated in Washington, DC., if they figure it out before it is too late.

Bay Area Guy said...

The article just confirms for the gazillionth time that the Left never got over the legitimate results of the 2016 election, so the desire to impeach began on Jan 20, 2017, before President Trump did anything impeachable.

The comment highlighted by Althouse confirms that the NYT has at least 1 sane reader in a sea of hysterical ninnies.

narciso said...

Held accountable for fast and furious, or tortuous interference with the tea party and any other actual policy decisions.

traditionalguy said...

As DJT has said many times, all of the media fake news out to get Trump removed is not aimed at Trump. It is aimed at impeaching the Deplorables who have impudently dare to use Trump's leadership to run their own country as a Christian Nation and refuse to bow down and be ruled by the old world's super rich, child murder and pedophilia Club.

We need to watch the freedom loving French people with the Yellow Vests being beaten and gassed in the streets by the EU's Armed forces brought in by a Vichy French puppet of Merkle's Fourth Reich...oh yeah that news has been totally censored. It might make Trump's loyal citizens oppose a fake impeachment.

narciso said...

Chuck has the squirrel pelt in his mouth:


https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2019/01/democrats_hoist_with_their_own_petard.html

Darrell said...

Chuck's suicide will bring this issue to a head--just like the Buddhist monks that doused themselves with gasoline and set themselves alight ended the Viet Nam war.
Just do it.

Brian said...

and the Office of Special Counsel is going to ultimately show us with surgical precision just how dirty the guy is.

Wishful thinking on your part. He will likely list a bunch of things, but we will be back where we stand today. If you think he's dirty now, you'll think he's dirty then. If you think there is an effort to undo the election, you'll think that the Mueller report is an effort to undo the election. Two movies.

MayBee said...

It’s interesting the subtle shift in how we view the CIA’s role in intelligence for the Iraq war. Now that the left embraces the CIA as anti-Trump, they are the victim of Bush’s blame

Dust Bunny Queen said...

so, they're[the radical leftards] Not JUST advocating a coup; they're DEMANDING CIVIL WAR

OK then.

They need to remember this old nugget. Be careful what you wish for, for you might just get it.

A thought. Who is it hat has the most to defend in a Civil War? The people who have been quietly playing by the rules and have meaningful lives with jobs, homes, businesses, children.... have not been motivated to put those things at risk. Not YET. Probably SOON.

Push hard enough at the core and you will see some results.

MayBee said...

Chuck said...
Althouse, neither you nor that NYT commenter (who couold not properly spell "led") Hahahahahah! Making fun of someone’s spelling error is always an invitation to make your own

Dust Bunny Queen said...

Trump lies?

Maybe. Probably. They all tell likes and make omissions.

Omissions are not necessarily lies either. Sometimes the omissions are on a need to know basis. Anyone with children knows THIS.

However, the left seems to have a big difficulty with the differentiation between actual out and out lies and plain ordinary hyperbole, which people use all the time and which normal people understand.

That difference is HUGE. Which is a hyperbolic statement and not necessarily a concrete reality of size difference.

narciso said...

Except those are the most progressive governors insley now Newsom who's the one in Oregon, just like on the east coast.

tcrosse said...

...the Office of Special Counsel is going to ultimately show us with surgical precision just how dirty the guy is.

What do you suppose they have on Mike Pence? You know, in the unlikely event the Senate votes to remove Trump.

MayBee said...

Anybody who says Trump lies and doesn’t care one iota about sending billions of cash to Iran and subverting banking laws to do it is. It a serious person.

rehajm said...

The Clintons have demonstrated dirty crooks can have long successful careers in politics.

Chuck said...

MayBee said...
Chuck said...
Althouse, neither you nor that NYT commenter (who couold not properly spell "led") Hahahahahah! Making fun of someone’s spelling error is always an invitation to make your own



?
I was pointing out the commenter's improper use of "lead" as a past tense.
Lies might "lead" to deaths today or tomorrow.
Lies "led" to deaths back in 2005.

That is, if I was some left-winger who believed that President George W. Bush "lied" about anything that led to our invasion of Iraq. But I'm not one of those left-wingers. And maybe it isn't even left-wingers. Maybe it is just nutjobs in general. Like our own President Nutjob.

rhhardin said...

Trump lies are a play to get media coverage. He's playing the left's need to debunk him to get 100% of the news cycle. If you don't notice this you're missing half the entertainment.

Unknown said...

1. Even if true, Trump's NDA payment to Daniels is not a campaign finance violation.
2. Even if it was, those are held to be civil violations resulting in fines.

These "impeachment" devotees are truly laughable. Any port in a storm.

THEOLDMAN

PJ57 said...

I used to enjoy reading many of the comments on this site -- bright, observant, clever folks like Mr. Hardin or Freeman Hunt, not to mention the irrepressible Laslo -- but the constant repetitive sniping between Chuck and his numerous correspondents has become incredibly tedious. Please try to write something interesting -- or write nothing at all.

Drago said...

Darrell: "Chuck's suicide will bring this issue to a head--just like the Buddhist monks that doused themselves with gasoline and set themselves alight ended the Viet Nam war.
Just do it."

Actually, a much better use of LLR Chuck by Chuck's leftist/Soros masters would be to fake-stage a "like, totally spontaneous protest against Trump" by "just your average, everyday, typical "conservative"' (LOL) and have another of LLR Chuck's allied FusionGPS operatives pose as an alt-right type who immolates LLR Chuck during this "highly moral, character filled, swellness-abounding" event.

After all, with all the bullets LLR Chuck has already taken for Team Dem/Left over the years, this final act would finally cement his place in history and no doubt La Presidenta for Life Harris would someday place a bust of LLR Chuck in the future Capital Rotunda/Free Abortion Clinic/Illegal Alien Voter Registration HQ!!

Perhaps knowing this would be the eventual outcome that would spur our #StrongStolenValorDemDefender to lessen his more obvious leftist rhetoric.

But then again, he isn't "LLR" Chuck for nuttin'.

BUMBLE BEE said...

I read the column. That author needs to be hospitalized and kept under observation. How fortunate for him he (like Chuck) is not required to substantiate his ravings. BTW was Obamacare hyperbole? maybe! Film maker cause Benghazi? To be sure! Why did Mike Flynn claim that Obama (and Hillary) knowingly armed ISIS. Jeepers how would he know any better than Joe Bag o Doughnuts?

Drago said...

Open Borders Fanboy and #StrongDemDefender Chuck: "That is, if I was some left-winger who believed that President George W. Bush "lied" about anything that led to our invasion of Iraq. But I'm not one of those left-wingers."

LOL

Might be the funniest thing written on "teh interwebs" today.

Easily.

narciso said...

Chuck needs to get hired at the bulwark, where his monomania doesn't stand out.

wildswan said...

Let's talk about people who want to impeach the muthfcka bringing jobs to Detroit. Do the Dems have another plan except to bring Venezuelan coups and Venezuelan economics and Venezuelan poverty to the US? Isn't that so stupid it's ugly?

Dems aren't acknowledging that the policies they support massively damaged the US economy and that this damage particularly hit those without college educations. Who are they? Two thirds the adults in this country do not have a college degree. Eighty-four percent of the Hispanics do not have a college degree; seventy-seven of the blacks do not have college degree. Without a college degree there are still sectors of the economy that have well-paying jobs, namely manufacturing, building and mining. But the elite decided to destroy manufacturing and restrict mining in this country (or allow that to happen). And the Dems supported that. And when the elite decided to destroy manufacturing and restrict mining in this country (or allow that to happen) they decided to destroy good jobs for eighty-four percent of the Hispanics, seventy-seven percent of the blacks - (and sixty-four percent of the whites and forty-four percent of the Asians.) And the Dems and Never Trumpers still support destroying good jobs for those with only a high school education. But Donald Trump does not. He is trying to reverse the situation. He's bringing back manufacturing jobs, allowing mining to flourish, lowering taxes to increase job formation, keeping energy prices low so as to make US manufacturing competitive. If you want to talk impeachment and high crimes and misdemeanors, let's talk about the people, Democrats and Never Trumpers, who don't want good jobs for sixty-six percent of the American people - for eighty-four percent of the Hispanics and seventy-seven percent of the blacks. Let's talk about people who won't work for good jobs. Or good schools. Or good policing. Let's talk about people who talk about inequality very much and very loud but who are loudly and vastly silent about the murder rate in Chicago and Baltimore and the high-school graduation rate in the black community in Detroit and New York and the unemployment rate in the black community in Milwaukee and Cleveland. Yeah, impeach the mthfcka, we don't want no stinking prosperity.

Drago said...

BUMBLEBEE: "BTW was Obamacare hyperbole?"

Uh oh.

Now you've done it. You've drug one of obama's most famous and undeniable lies into the conversation and I shudder to think of what LLR Chuck is going to launch back at you in his inevitable counter-attack to defend his "magnificent" obama. LLR Chuck positively despises criticism of "The One", the "LightBringer", the "Sort of a God".

My God, have you seen how creased obambi's pants remain? Every "LLR" was sold on that fact alone.

God speed BUMBLEBEE. God speed.

Ann Althouse said...

If Trump is as horrible as Leonhardt says, why hasn't Mueller come forward quickly so we can get Trump out of office. At this point, so much time has passed and the next election is close. It doesn't add up to impeachment. The grounds L cites are the kind of things you could amass about any President. We can't live like this.

MayBee said...

Chuck- I was pointing out your use of the non-existent word "couold" when you were deriding another's spelling/usage.

rcocean said...

Will of the majority = "Tyranny of the Masses"

When it favors Republicans. Otherwise, its "The voice of the people".

rcocean said...

The MSM don't need Mueller anymore, they have Pelosi.

Chuck said...

Marcus said...
1. Even if true, Trump's NDA payment to Daniels is not a campaign finance violation.
2. Even if it was, those are held to be civil violations resulting in fines.
...


Everybody has a right to their own opinion. But they don't have a right to their own facts.

Trump's involvement as Individual 1 in the Cohen criminal information points to violations of federal law beyond campaign finance violations.

But just off the top of my head:

~Trump's problem is not just making a payment in exchange for an NDA. Trump and his lawyers went to extraordinary lengths to conceal the payment(s) including using shell corporations, payments to attorneys disguised as legal fees, and other tax law and banking law problems.

~Trump's other problem is that while making a payment of his own money for an NDA may not be criminal (it may be, however), it is a crime to fail to report it, when the failure to report is with criminal intent to deceive the FEC.

~And please do remember that at least one woman was paid by the National Enquirer's parent corporation for her story, in order to secure her story and bury it. David Pecker and his company are cooperating with federal investigators. That was corporate money used to benefit the Trump campaign.

~Just ask John Edwards whether similar acts are "criminal" or "civil." Ask Michael Cohen whether he is going to jail for "civil" or a "criminal" infractions.

Drago said...

Ann Althouse: "If Trump is as horrible as Leonhardt says, why hasn't Mueller come forward quickly so we can get Trump out of office. At this point, so much time has passed and the next election is close. It doesn't add up to impeachment. The grounds L cites are things you could amass about any President. We can't live like this."

On the contrary, it is inevitable with the left/LLR's that we end up like this. This is in fact the natural arc of events. In the West this is happening everywhere. The far left/LLR/OpenBorders/Islamic radical alliance is already bringing Europe close to its knees along with the desire to let a thousand Venezuela's bloom.

Who ever told you that any free republic or free nation could survive once the leftists/statists/LLR decided they could vote out the electorate until they got the one they wanted?

Because that's where we are today. The dems/LLR's have decided to vote out the US electorate.

This is not going to "get better", so in a way, Althouse is correct. With the complete weaponization of the state which was used to frame and try to stop an opposing political candidate and that action being openly applauded by literally ALL the dems/LLR's, we can't live like this....because we are going to live in something worse than this.

And probably sooner rather than later.

Unfortunately.

Mueller cannot ever end his "investigation", because at that very moment Trump would declassify everything in sight and we'd learn "officially" things like how Comey and DOJ NSD allowed Democrat operatives full access to FISA databases for illegal and improper surveillance of political opponents.

Precisely as outlined by FISA Court Judge Rosemary Collyer, who estimated 85% of all searches were improper.

The dems/LLR's have been fighting tooth and nail to keep the parties responsible for that under wraps.

Mueller and his team of Clinton lawyers ARE the Strzok/Page "Insurance Policy" for the dems.

rcocean said...

They're going to make Trump's Presidency so terrible that no one will EVER cross the Elite again.

They don't just want to stop Trump - they want to stop any FUTURE Trump's.

RK said...

Leonhardt is just masturbating in public with the column. Gross.

Darrell said...

MayBee,

Chuck's ignorance is intentional and deliberate. No one is that incessantly stupid .

Drago said...

Darrell: "MayBee, Chuck's ignorance is intentional and deliberate. No one is that incessantly stupid"

Actually, every single far left activist is that incessantly stupid.

Every single one of them.

It's simply a "coincidence" that a "LLR" is that incessantly stupid as well.

A pure, innocent "coincidence"......

rcocean said...

I'm still shocked at how the whole Mueller thing came about. The AG - for no good reason - recuses himself, and then lets his Deputy AG - a Democrat - appoint Comey's friend as Special Counsel and then gives him a Blank Check to investigate Trump.

Insane!

And we know now that Comey/McCabe should have been investigated - not Trump.

narciso said...

Yes looking at the big picture, the obstruction of Brexit, the resistance to Macron's skydragon agenda, the synchronized play with Qatar and Turkey against Israel and the other gulf states.

narciso said...

It's the plame game all over again, just from different places on the board.

Chuck said...

Ann Althouse said...
If Trump is as horrible as Leonhardt says, why hasn't Mueller come forward quickly so we can get Trump out of office. At this point, so much time has passed and the next election is close. It doesn't add up to impeachment. The grounds L cites are the kind of things you could amass about any President. We can't live like this.


Respectfully, I think that the reason that Mueller is taking so long is because he is building a case against a sitting President unlike any legal/criminal case that has ever been presented to the American people.

And not anything like the vague, broad-brush assertions that Leonhardt made.

But Althouse; did you blog this story for any of Leonhardt's assertions, or was it in service of your editorial selection of the one NYT commenter's reaction?

narciso said...

Back then Ashcroft Comey fitzgerald mueller now sessions Rosenstein mueller wray.

Drago said...

narciso: "Yes looking at the big picture, the obstruction of Brexit, the resistance to Macron's skydragon agenda, the synchronized play with Qatar and Turkey against Israel and the other gulf states."

Make sure you include Powell at the Fed, "protecting us" from non-existent inflation and higher wages and no doubt planning on "protecting" us even more, in spades, as we come up to 2020.

When even Jim Cramer on CNBC is screaming into the camera "what are you doing?" at Powell, you know the money guys are getting uncomfortable with all LLR Chucks lefty allies playing politics transparently with the money supply.

Angle-Dyne, Servant of Ugliness said...

AA: We can't live like this.

Maybe "we" can't, but apparently the commenters at the NYT, and the people they represent, can't live otherwise. It might be a sanity- or life-threatening thing to take away the "Trump is Hitler" drug from such people. (I mean "sanity" in the sense of "last shreds of".)

So I guess it's us or them, eh?

narciso said...

Probably but this has been the pattern with Volcker and Greenspan at different times, the main problem is we doubled up on the debt so any hike makes the financing of it more prohibitive.

tcrosse said...

Trump knows a thing or two about Professional Wrestling. There's a point in the show where the Good Guy is on the receiving end of every dirty move the Bad Guy can dish out. Just when it looks like he's done for, he rises from the canvas and sets in to kick ass. He has to take a certain amount of punishment so he remains sympathetic when he starts dishing it back out.

narciso said...

Back then it was the prospect of the espionage act, which leveraged the special counsel now it was the Logan act, but you had to strip out all the context to make the narrative work.

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

The left are so filled with entitlement to power (see Clinton, Hillary) they know they are owed power and they can snatch it any time, for any reason.

The left prove daily why they are scary totalitarian dictator wannabees.

Drago said...

Angle-dyne: "So I guess it's us or them, eh?"

Fundamentally, yes.

At this point there is no "going back". This is becoming clear to the Brits who see a near majority of their nation willing to support a group of Remainers on the inside of the Tories and all of Labor to literally undo the Brexit vote.

We see the EU lefties/LLR-types working to literally undo all individual nation desires at every level to the point where those nations disappear. Merkel has recently made this quite clear.

And here we have the dem/LLR establishment working to undo an election which has exposed them. They can never be "unexposed" again. That jig is up. The only way forward for them now is raw power, in your face, do what we say and shut up tactics.

That's what Mueller and his team is all about. They are clearly violating laws left and right (we accidently scrubbed Strzok/Page cell phones!! Oooooops!!) while conjuring up new make believe laws to prosecute opponents.

So here we are.

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

Democratics and their media lie. Continually.

William said...

I would prefer a President who doesn't have a history of sex with a pornstar. I would prefer a Congress which doesn't think sex with a pornstar is an impeachable offense.....Sex with a Playmate of the Year is okay though. It demonstrates some negotiating skills.

Chuck said...

PJ57 said...
I used to enjoy reading many of the comments on this site -- bright, observant, clever folks like Mr. Hardin or Freeman Hunt, not to mention the irrepressible Laslo -- but the constant repetitive sniping between Chuck and his numerous correspondents has become incredibly tedious. Please try to write something interesting -- or write nothing at all.



My comments routinely go to the substance of what Athouse wrote. Look at my first comment on any given page, and it is always addressed to Althouse and her post.

The real, simple problem with this blog's comments pages is that my on-point criticism of Trump is met by unending personal attacks on me by the likes of Drago, Birkel, president mom jeans, Full Moon, etc. You can see it on this page, right now.

I might feel bad, that Atlhouse's comments pages could be driving away readers through no fault of hers, but it is her responsibility if not her fault. She doesn't want to be bothered with doing the moderation of some of her routinely offensive commenters. It's her blog; so it's up to her.

Brian said...

ust ask John Edwards whether similar acts are "criminal" or "civil."

John Edwards was acquitted. So his similar acts were not, in fact, criminal.

Tommy Duncan said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Tommy Duncan said...

Chuck said: "...the Office of Special Counsel is going to ultimately show us with surgical precision just how dirty the guy is."

I think the phrase you were looking for is "geometric logic".

Captain Queeg: "Ahh, but the strawberries that's... that's where I had them. They laughed at me and made jokes but I proved beyond the shadow of a doubt and with... geometric logic... that a duplicate key to the wardroom icebox DID exist, and I'd have produced that key if they hadn't of pulled the Caine out of action."

Anonymous said...

The pressure on Mueller to find something, anything must be incredible.
I'm starting to feel sorry for him.

Prediction:

The final Mueller report will be so equivocal that Trump will be implicated
in events varying from the JFK assassination to the decline in polar bears
to absolutely nothing.
It will have something for everyone.

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

I keep asking leftists to name the crime.

It's hilarious when they mention the time Trump joked about Putin finding Hillary's deleted e-mails. Hillary set up a private server and then deleted her e-mails to cover her tracks. But Trump joking about it IS THE REAL CRIME! IMPEACH!

WisRich said...

Drago said..

Unfortunately.

Mueller cannot ever end his "investigation", because at that very moment Trump would declassify everything in sight and we'd learn "officially" things like how Comey and DOJ NSD allowed Democrat operatives full access to FISA databases for illegal and improper surveillance of political opponents.

Precisely as outlined by FISA Court Judge Rosemary Collyer, who estimated 85% of all searches were improper.

The dems/LLR's have been fighting tooth and nail to keep the parties responsible for that under wraps.

Mueller and his team of Clinton lawyers ARE the Strzok/Page "Insurance Policy" for the dems.,\i.


Agreed. I read somewhere that the Special Counsel IS the cover up of the FBI/DOJ/Obama administration scandal so it won't end until Trump is out of office. I agree with that analysis. Case in point: The investigation was given yet another 6 month extension.

Bleach Drinkers Curing Coronavirus Together said...

The grounds L cites are the kind of things you could amass about any President. We can't live like this.

We can't live with Trump's unprecedented mismanagement of the government and his office. The crimes his closest associates have been hauled away for are serious. It's not normal for one's closest attorney-advisor to have a warrant executed against his practice, let alone a quick conviction on eight counts for it. He hides everything and has no standing to demand a presumption of uncorrupted office. If the Republicans weren't a broken, go-along party who happened to control the Senate this wouldn't even be a question. Everyone knows that impeachment is a political standard.

The stability you seek to see and convince us of in this lunatic's administration is horrendous.

Bob Boyd said...

Scott Adams said Trump has largely dispelled the early fears stoked by his adversaries that he is crazy, will get us into a huge war, get us nuked by the Norks, crash the economy, etc. So the criticism has devolved to personal attacks. Adams said that is winning from Trump's perspective.

William said...

i suppose a fair argument can be made that Trump's personal ethics are lax and that his hyperbole is occasionally obnoxious. Still, these are not impeachable offenses and Trump is the man the American people elected. To try to impeach a man on these grounds does more harm to the Constitution than any of Trimp's rhetorical excesses or personal flaws.

Molly said...

David Begley: impeachment is "ultimately a political decision." I came to the same conclusion during the Clinton impeachment. But very recently I heard a radio interview (probably c-span, so it may be on their website) with Alan Dershowitz who has written a book on the subject that caused me to re-think the question. He made the case that (1) there is a constitutional recourse for removing a president for purely political reasons -- the next election (2) therefore there has to be an underlying crime (and the term misdemeanor does not mean a non-serious crime, according to Dershowitz) and (3) the chief justice presides at a Senate trial, and could (if the chief justice agrees with Dershowitz interpretation) rule on a motion from the defense to dismiss the charges on the grounds that they do not contain an allegation of crime.

Original Mike said...

Althouse said..."We can't live like this."

Yet we can't stop them. It's demoralizing.

James K said...

Blogger Obadiah said...
He makes a good point and immediately undermines it by citing W's decision to go into Iraq. There's no proof W lied about that.

Actually there’s proof he didn’t lie. He cited official intelligence estimates, on which basis many Dems as well as Rs voted to authorize military action.

Fernandinande said...

The poor old NYT is all over this local news case for some mysterious reason!

The Latest: Texas Sheriff Releases Shooting Victims’ Names – The …
6 days ago

Gunman Fires on Car in Houston Area, Killing 7-Year-Old Girl – The …
6 days ago –

Police Searching for Gunman Who Fired Into Car and Killed a 7-Year …
5 days ago

The Latest: Victim: Gunman Fired Beside and in Front of Car – The …
5 days ago

Texas Officials Have Image of Pickup Involved in Attack – The New …
5 days ago

Officials Seek Driver Who Fired Into Car, Killing Texas Girl – The New …
4 days ago

The Latest: Sheriff: Motive in Fatal Shooting Still Unclear – The New …
3 days ago

Police Investigating Drive-By Shooting of Jazmine Barnes Seek …
3 days ago

Sketch Released of Suspect in Shooting of Texas Girl – The New York …
2 days ago –

Mother: Jazmine Barnes’ Killing Was a Hail of Glass, Bullets – The New …
1 day ago

Hundreds Rally as 7-Year-Old Girl’s Killer Remains at Large – The …
7 hours ago

At Rally for Jazmine Barnes, an Outpouring of Grief and a Plea for …
5 hours ago -
Jazmine, who was black, was in the car with her mother and three sisters when a white man pulled his red pickup truck beside them and began shooting, the police said.

Brian said...

He has to take a certain amount of punishment so he remains sympathetic when he starts dishing it back out.

That's been my argument from day one. Trump has telegraphed with his tweets that he will declassify things (everything?) if this gets to far. Even if its his last day in office I expect that it will happen.

Personally, I think it's been proven that the intelligence community (notice I didn't say Obama) was spying on the Trump campaign. The Mueller investigation is about giving a cover story for that spying. Trump is dirty. He's in bed with the Russians. We, of course, had to spy on him. Please don't change the underlying infrastructure that we use to spy on people. That's the "insurance policy" that Strozk/Page texted about.

The rest of this is window dressing. They are running out the clock until the 2020 election, in the hopes he doesn't win. Again.

gilbar said...

MayBee, i believe that i have figured out our LLR's

He had NO idea what you were talking about when you pointed out his spelling of couold, because (unlike Stupid US), he NEVER Reads his posts. He has no more idea what the hell you're talking with couold, then he did with people saying that people had said that Trump had paid chix for sex (that one was particularly good, 'cause He said that Trump had paid chix for sex, WHILE denying that anyone had ever said that).

See? LLR's don't read their own posts; so, there's little point in showing them their multitude of errors. They will have No Idea what you're talking about, and will just ignore: as should we

Fernandinande said...

Oops, I forgot to mention - they arrested a black guy for shooting the black kid and he confessed.

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

Again - not one single leftwinger can name an actual Trump crime. An actual crime.
They can point to Manafort - who is now facing prison time for tax crimes that happened decades ago. or his personal lawyer, who is facing prison time namely not for payments to porn stars for for his tax evasion issues.

rhhardin said...

The real, simple problem with this blog's comments pages is that my on-point criticism of Trump is met by unending personal attacks on me by the likes of Drago, Birkel, president mom jeans, Full Moon, etc. You can see it on this page, right now.

Don't respond. Rhetorically you come out way ahead.

Chuck said...

Brian said...
"[J]ust ask John Edwards whether similar acts are "criminal" or "civil."

John Edwards was acquitted. So his similar acts were not, in fact, criminal.


Edwards was indicted, and taken to trial. That right there would be an argument against any motion for dismissal filed by lawyers on behalf of Trump.

Edwards was not actually acquitted. He was found not guilty on one count. There was a hung jury on five other counts. The prosecution had witness problems that do no pertain in the Trump case. There were few if any cooperating co-conspirators in the Edwards case. In Trump's case, his personal attorney, his CFO, and his close friend David Pecker all appear to be cooperating, with a paper trail unlike the Edwards case.

But just as an aside; I don't plan to live or die on whether it is campaign finance violations that provide grounds for an impeachment of Donald J. Trump. I truly don't know, but I expect that Trump has been on the wrong side of the law in even more serious contexts, and that the Office of Special Counsel will expose them.

gilbar said...

Tommy Duncan
Let's review:
Before Trump, there Were Strawberries
Now that there IS Trump, There Are NO Strawberries

If i got a straightedge, a compass, and a protractor; i could draw it out for you!

gilbar said...

Fernandistein said...
Oops, I forgot to mention - they arrested a black guy for shooting the black kid and he confessed.


so, not only was he a murderer; but, he was acting like a White Guy? That's a CRIME!

Original Mike said...

"I truly don't know, but I expect that Trump has been on the wrong side of the law in even more serious contexts, and that the Office of Special Counsel will expose them."

"Nobody knows what Mueller knows."©️

You owe Inga a royalty.

WisRich said...

An addendum to the "The Special Counsel is the coverup" analysis, it just occurred to me that if the analysis is true, then the Dem's will never get the results of the investigation to use as the basis for impeachment.

Mueller can't close down the investigation until Trumps out of office and the Dem's can't get Trump out of office until Mueller completes the investigation. How ironic.

MayBee said...

Tony Rezko.
Rod Blagojevich
Bill Ayers
Bernardine Dohrn

Having close associates who are convicted of crimes is indeed unprecedented

Sebastian said...

"unseat a duly elected President. How so?"

Progs would love to "unseat" him, of course. But applying the Universal Theory of Progressive Instrumentalism, we understand that impeachment talk is a tool: it delegitimates Trump and the deplorables, it obstructs normal political bargaining, it construes Trump as Orange Man Mean in the minds of impressionable women, and it makes any association with Trump taboo.

"We can't live like this," says Althouse. Which is so nice and sensitive. But also beside the point: progs are scorching the polity and the culture, using any weapons at their disposal. Yes, We can, is their motto. They know they can count on the Althouses when it counts, cuz women's bodies.

Brian said...

I truly don't know, but I expect that Trump has been on the wrong side of the law in even more serious contexts, and that the Office of Special Counsel will expose them.

There must be something! Something! He's dirty! *rubbing his ball bearings in his hand* Clack clack. Clack clack.

That should be your new nickname. Chuck. "Clack"

Or Captain Strawberry?

Bleach Drinkers Curing Coronavirus Together said...

"Althouse said..."We can't live like this."

Yet we can't stop them. It's demoralizing.


Achilles thinks he's got the answer. Every day he shows up to suggest that a massive war against the majority of this country - predicated on a false flag of losing their guns and speech rights - will wipe out the Democratic-moderate-progressive-normal majority of this great country whom you conservatives hate so much and feel you should have so much power over.

So maybe you could try that, right?

Greg Hlatky said...

With respect to current investigations, I intend to cite the defense employed by the Clintons and their apologists and sycophants: unless it's proven beyond a shadow of a doubt in a court of law, not only is Trump stainlessly innocent but his accusers are vile calumnators who are beneath contempt.

Bleach Drinkers Curing Coronavirus Together said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Bruce Hayden said...

"Not JUST advocating a coup; they're DEMANDING CIVIL WAR"

And the other side is buying guns and practicing how to use them. The more heated the rhetoric on the left, the more guns the right buys. I suspect that this isn't going to end well.

chickelit said...

PJ57 said...
I used to enjoy reading many of the comments on this site -- bright, observant, clever folks like Mr. Hardin or Freeman Hunt, not to mention the irrepressible Laslo -- but the constant repetitive sniping between Chuck and his numerous correspondents has become incredibly tedious. Please try to write something interesting -- or write nothing at all.
_____________________

Chuck needs pushback. He's dead set on bringing down Trump. Worse, he can't do the aftermath of what would follow that, other than to imagine a serene rule by Mitt Romney. Chuck shares a generic problem with the Left: they have no viable alternative and yet they expect the American people to clear the decks and start over. Not gonna happen.

chickelit said...

@Chuck: Focus on building up rather than tearing down. Get all phallic on us. Erect something. Only then can you expect to elect something.

Clyde said...

Come the revolution, that insufficiently-fervent comrade commenter will be the first one up against the wall.

Bleach Drinkers Curing Coronavirus Together said...

The sheer entitlement of retrogrades complaining about impeachment threats - and their effect on "overturning" the results of a popular loss - are remarkable. These are the same schmucks who impeached Bill Clinton. Absolutely remarkable.

John henry said...

Boulder Colorado passed a law requiring registration of AR15s

Compliance has been underwhelming

John Henry

chickelit said...

The sheer entitlement of retrogrades threatening impeachment - and their effect on "overturning" an Electoral College win - are remarkable. These are the same schmucks who complained about impeaching Bill Clinton. Absolutely remarkable.

chickelit said...

johnhenry100 said...
Boulder Colorado passed a law requiring registration of AR15s

Compliance has been underwhelming

___________________
Have they tried rewarding snitching?

Yancey Ward said...

Dave Begley wrote:

"I looked at the Articles of Impeachment filed in the last Congress by Al Green of Texas. A joke."

I think the Democrats in the House have no choice but to impeach- to not do so will piss off half the base or more. I do think the more pragmatic portions of the membership realize the danger in doing so, but won't be able to stand up to the pressure that will be applied by the media itself. The timing, though, is hard to predict. They will have to wait for Mueller to file a report, and I don't think he intends to do so until January 2020 at the earliest now, so the Democrats may have to do the impeachment without Mueller.

Chuck said...

chickenlittle said...
@Chuck: Focus on building up rather than tearing down...


Hence, one of my favorite topics. The "replace" part of "repeal and replace." What does that look like? What is the replacement? Trump says that it will be "great." It will "cover everybody." There will be lower premiums, lower co-pays, and better coverage. Trump has said all of that. I'd like to see the details on that.

I am not going to go any farther on that; this isn't a healthcare reform post. And Althouse has made it clear that she finds the details of healthcare reform boring.

But Trump was supposed to be a great builder, a great negotiator, THE great dealmaker. And yet he has yet to make a single great deal. (No, the modernization of NAFTA was not a great deal. It isn't a bad deal, of course. Like NAFTA wasn't a bad deal. But I wonder how many Republicans in the Senate will vote to ratify a treaty that, for instance, forces American employers to offer employment protections to LGBTQ employees and to pregnant employees.)

chickelit said...

But I wonder how many Republicans in the Senate will vote to ratify a treaty that, for instance, forces American employers to offer employment protections to LGBTQ employees and to pregnant employees.)

Are they somehow unworthy of protections?

Gunner said...

Paying off slutty women is not a campaign violation. Nobody cared when Clinton and Edwards did it. Bill deceived the country by pretending he liked Hillary! Where was the outrage?

traditionalguy said...

Assassinating DJT is harder than JFK was. So impeachment is all they have left.

John henry said...

Seems to me that using google, as well as Twitter, Chrome facebook etc is playing into fascist hands.

PDJT should move from Twitter to Gab, Mastadon or another platform. He can forward his posts to Twitter for max visability.

But he can delay them a few hours. He can also not forward everything. This would nudge people away from twitter. He can frame this as being more inclusive so people banned on Twitter can follow him.

John Henry

Seeing Red said...

Trump has violated campaign finance law

So did Obama with the credit cards.

Trumpit said...

I'm not "standing up idly" to impeach a "duly erected" president for mere lying to one and all. This is not about the meaning of "is" "and," or "but."

Schlump's plans for a wall are falling apart around him:

SCHLUMP:
Wherefore was that cry for impeachment?

JOHN KELLY:
"The best-laid plans of mice and men / Go oft awry."

SCHLUMP:

They should have died a stillbirth hereafter;
There would have been an hour for such a word as wall or, nay fence
To-morrow, and to-morrow, and to-morrow,
Creeps in this petty pace from day to day
To the last syllable of recorded time,
And all our yesterdays have lighted fools
The way to dusty death. Out, out, brief candle!
Life's but a walking shadow, a poor golfer
That swings and misses his blighted hour upon my golf course @mar-a-lago
And then is heard no more: it is a tale
Told by an idiot, who I know only too well, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.

Wildcat Kelley, looking mighty pale
Was standing by the President's side
That's when Sheriff Mueller said, "I'm sending you, Donald John Trump. to jail,
Schlump raised his sorry head and cried:
Oh, give me land, lots of land under starry skies above
Don't fence me in
Let me ride through the wide open country that I love
Don't fence me in
Let me be by myself in the evening breeze
Listen to the murmur of the cottonwood trees
Send me off forever but I ask you please
Don't fence me in
Just turn me loose, let me straddle my old saddle
Underneath the Western skies
On my Cayuse, let me wander over yonder
Till I see the mountains rise



Yancey Ward said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
exhelodrvr1 said...

Obviously Mueller has nothing

Kevin said...

My comments routinely go to the substance of what Athouse wrote. Look at my first comment on any given page, and it is always addressed to Althouse and her post.

Here’s a clue: Althouse’s post was not about what’s in the column.

Bruce Hayden said...

"I'm still shocked at how the whole Mueller thing came about. The AG - for no good reason - recuses himself, and then lets his Deputy AG - a Democrat - appoint Comey's friend as Special Counsel and then gives him a Blank Check to investigate Trump."

The special counsel investigation was, of corse, legally justified based on the infamous Steele Dossier, paid for by the Clinton campaign and the DNC (which was essentially being run by the Clinton campaign through their control of DNC finances).

Nevertheless, there is a good argument that the Mueller investigation is part of the Insurance Policy plotted out by Strzok, Page, etc, around DD McCabe's $70,000 conference room table in the summer of 2016. The continuity between the DoJ and FBI spying on Trump with FISA warrants does include both Strzok and Page, who managed, for a short time, to get themselves appointed to the Mueller team (until that was sabatogued by the release of their text messages - likely with OIG assistance). But more importantly probably, Mueller's "pit bull", Andrew Weissman, started meeting with Steele and Simpson in August 2016, along with AAG Bruce Ohr, whose wife was Fusion GPS' Russian expert, and likely wrote some of the Dossier (based on writing styles - she was their PhD academic, while Steele was a former reporter). Both Ohr and Weissman were apparently working in Organized Crime, so had no legitimate reason to be involved in a National Security investigation. Yet, there they were, working as a back door between Steele and the FBI, after the agency had been forced to cancel their contract with Fusion, due to Steele flogging the Dossier to the press. This was most of a year before Weissman was detailed from Organized Crime to the Mueller investigation. One theory is that the Mueller investigation, and Weissman in particular, are acting as a conduit for the illegally acquired FISA 702 database search results from the first third of 2016 (likely acquired by Fusion as one of the contractors illegally given access to the FISA databases by the FBI) to the House committees that are now investigating Trump to get him impeached.

The timing is going to be interesting. The House committees now under Dem partisan control, anda with new Rules imposed by new Speaker Palsi, that reason to keep the Mueller investigation going is winding down. There is still the ability of Mueller to keep a lot of things classified (because of their ongoing investigation). But there will very soon be a new AG confirmed, since the Dems don't control the Senate, AND nominations can no longer be held up indefinitely with filibusters. And Trump's AG nominee has apparently vowed to open a lot of this up, and that will show that the Mueller investigation was based on Clinton campaign opposition research (the Steele Dossier), etc. The new AG doesn't have to actually shut Mueller down, but just declassify a couple documents ordered declassified by PDJT. From that, some expected Mueller to turn in his report by the end of the month - but they got their grand jury extended another six months, which suggests just the opposite. Should be interesting.

Kevin said...

this isn't a healthcare reform post.

And yet here we are.

Yancey Ward said...

WisRich wrote:

"Mueller can't close down the investigation until Trumps out of office and the Dem's can't get Trump out of office until Mueller completes the investigation. How ironic."

This is a good observation, I think. I don't think it improbable that Mueller is still investigating in November of 2020. Lawrence Walsh bookended Bush Senior's entire presidency, and Fiske/Starr ran for over 4 1/2 years during Clinton's two terms.

WintersTale said...

"That Trump is more blatant in his lies and lies more often does not make him worse (or in need of impeachment) than his predecessors."

Wby, yes. Yes it does.

chickelit said...

@Chuck: Quit acting like Trump has been all bluster on reforming healthcare. Take a moment to review what he actually has proposed.

Chuck said...

Kevin said...
My comments routinely go to the substance of what Athouse wrote. Look at my first comment on any given page, and it is always addressed to Althouse and her post.

Here’s a clue: Althouse’s post was not about what’s in the column.


I had thought that I was more aware of that than anyone commenting so far. Up above at 8:53 I was asking Althouse about that specifically and directly.

Chuck said...

chickenlittle said...
@Chuck: Quit acting like Trump has been all bluster on reforming healthcare. Take a moment to review what he actually has proposed.


Okay. I took a moment.

Now -- if you really want to take these comments in the off-topic direction of a detailed healthcare reform debate -- take a moment to let me know how Trump plans to fulfill his varying wild claims on national health care.

Honestly, if you demur, I will not hold it against you. I'd like to have a healthcare debate, but they rarely occur here since it is of such little interest to Althouse.

Leland said...

The NYT is lucky to have commenters like that, as it exposes them to truly thoughtful discussion.

Yancey Ward said...

Does anyone have a white whale emoji for Chuck to chase?

Bleach Drinkers Curing Coronavirus Together said...

The sheer entitlement of retrogrades threatening impeachment - and their effect on "overturning" an Electoral College win - are remarkable. These are the same schmucks who complained about impeaching Bill Clinton. Absolutely remarkable.

Hey there, chickenshit! If you're so opposed to democracy and feel that a slave-state balancing remnant should hold a permanent veto over it then just say so. It would fit right in with the rest of your many inept and immoral social opinions.

FullMoon said...

Bruce Hayden is a lawyer
Chuck is a lawyer.

Compare the body their comments .
Who would you hire for any serious matter? Save money and take the crazy, or pay top dollar and win your case?

Just kidding!

John henry said...

Then an executive order banning Google and Chrome from govt computers. Make Brave, edge, dragon or Firefox the default.

There are 2 reasons:

Human rights - Google is actively working with the Chinese govt to censor what Chinese residents can see.

As a private business that is Google's right. As a sovereign nation, that is China's right.

But the US govt should not be complicit.

Business - Google is refusing to do business with the govt. Seems wrong that the govt should do business with them.

Just block google and remove chrome by executive order.

John Henry

Paco Wové said...

"Yes it does."

No, it doesn't.

Ok, your turn now!

WintersTale said...

"Ok, your turn now!"

Ok, congress's turn now!

Achilles said...

Chuck said...
chickenlittle said...
@Chuck: Quit acting like Trump has been all bluster on reforming healthcare. Take a moment to review what he actually has proposed.


“Okay. I took a moment.“

Chuck went to the first leftist Pravda offering he could find that completely misrepresented what trump has tried to do and ignored what cuck traitor democrats like flake and McCain did to stop him.

Nothing happened with healthcare because of shitheads like you chuck.

Fuck you and your uniparty tool friends. I am sure the leader of the cucks, Mittens o’romney who wrote Obamacare, has great ideas on health care.

Nobody likes traitors.

John henry said...

Then determine if Facebook has any legitimate govt use. Block it otherwise. Allow legitimate exceptions as needed

People should not be facebooking privately on govt time, computers or bandwidth.

John Henry

Bleach Drinkers Curing Coronavirus Together said...

Nobody likes traitors.

How's that plan of yours to case up America taking shape? Remember, all non-Republicans - all 200 million+ of them - will have to be shot, according to you.

Your country hasn't betrayed you. You've betrayed your country. It's hard to have one when you think the vast majority of the people living in it have to go.

WintersTale said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
John henry said...

Chuck,

He promised repeal and replace.

He has repealed it. Effectively, anyway.

He is ropa-doping and letting the free market replace it.

So far the market is doing a nice job though there is a ways to go.

Sounds like promise made, promise kept to me.

Or did you think he promised more (but perhaps different) govt healthcare?

More fool you if you did.

John Henry

alanc709 said...

How come Dems want Medicare-for-all. Why not VA medical coverage for all? Because then people would realize what a lousy and expensive program they'd be getting?

John henry said...

Fullmoon,

Bruce Hayden IS a lawyer AND he always sounds like he knows what he's talkibg about.

Chuck CLAIMS TO BE a lawyer but seldom seems to know what he's talking about.

John Henry

John henry said...

I seldom pay attention to Chuck. He's always struck me as a less entertaining less knowledgeable version of Squeamish Fascist.

Less clear thinking too.

John Henry

narciso said...

Certainly there was no legitimate basis for the special counsel, everything flows from there.

Michael said...

PPT"Hey there, chickenshit! If you're so opposed to democracy and feel that a slave-state balancing remnant should hold a permanent veto over it then just say so. It would fit right in with the rest of your many inept and immoral social opinions."

I think a national referendum on abortion, gay marriage and a myriad of SJW beloved tenets might cause one to change one's mind about this. Don't think PPT would like the outcome of pure democracy.

Gospace said...

Chuck said...
Trump's involvement as Individual 1 in the Cohen criminal information points to violations of federal law beyond campaign finance violations.

But just off the top of my head:

~Trump's problem is not just making a payment in exchange for an NDA. Trump and his lawyers went to extraordinary lengths to conceal the payment(s) including using shell corporations, payments to attorneys disguised as legal fees, and other tax law and banking law problems.


So what? No one cares! Everyone lies about sex! It's an already established defense against impeachment.

Jack Klompus said...

"...all 200 million+ of them - will have to be shot, according to you."

And you'll be the first one against the wall, you socially retarded cretin. Then A again that's the waste of a good bullet. You can just be pushed in front of speeding traffic.

Chuck said...

Yes, John Henry, I took Trump at his word. He hasn't delivered, he could never deliver and I think that only fools would ever have believed him.

Trump on universal, government-funded healthcare.

That's not Trump's relying on the free market. Trump was promising that his government would take care of everybody.

Absolutely everyone would like a plan, if one existed, that lowered costs, lowered premiums, covered everyone and provided great care. With no cuts to Social Security, Medicare or Medicaid. Trump promised all of that, and has not done so much as propose a plan that would do all of that.

John henry said...

Alanc

Have you ever been in a VA facility? I've been getting all my healcare, general and specialist at the San Juan VA hospital and the Ceiba satellite clinic for 10—12 years now.

Absolutely top notch in all respects.

I have no experience with any other va facilities but understand there is a lot of variability.

So govt CAN, in some cases, run decent health care. That doesn't mean they should.

Another difference is that I EARNED my VA benefits.

Medicare/medicaid is welfare.

John Henry

Bleach Drinkers Curing Coronavirus Together said...

I guess that just goes to show how out-of-touch you are, Michael. You and those other 135 hedge fund traders running the Trump admin's priorities. Americans approve of gay marriage 67%. It's hard for a politician or policy to find much more support than that. But as an elitist robber-baron I can see why you'd be confused about what it is that the people actually want. You're so used to buying the politicians to support your crony capitalism that you assume the social injustice crap and military-industrial-complex crap they pasted on to it were necessary to keep the coalition of the corrupt going. But apparently no longer.

Bleach Drinkers Curing Coronavirus Together said...

Is that how you're used to doing it in South America, Jim Daniels?

What a shame that we don't have more fascist tin pot dictators here for you to align with and affiliate with. The sense of alienation in your desperately violent grunts and groans is palpable. What a horrible thing that you have to live in a liberal democracy. But of course, no one's forcing you to stay here now are they?

Chuck said...

Gospace, it isn't a matter of Trump "lying about sex." I presume that Trump lies about sex all the time. I don't think the guy is even having sex anymore. Not with his wife -- in her separate bedroom -- anyway.

The lying that Trump needs to worry about is lying on FEC reports; lying on tax returns; lying to federal investigators and the Office of Special Counsel; and lying on national television to the American people.

John henry said...

How do you mean he hasn't delivered, chuck?

Do you mean we still have Obamcare? Yes, still a few vestiges but those are going away. They'll be completely gone in another year or so

So what are you talking
about?

John Henry

Jack Klompus said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Chuck said...

What I mean, John Henry, is that Trump hasn't overseen any true repeal of Obamacare. Repeal would require a Senate vote, which would require 60 votes for cloture. Trump has never gotten that. Not by persuasion, or negotiation, or by the force of his sparkling personality.

The only thing that has been done legislatively to Obamacare, is some around-the-edges vandalism, as with the party-line vote on the tax bill. Obamacare can only be truly repealed via a bill passing both houses of Congress. With a majority in the House and with 60 votes to allow a vote in the Senate.

But the really big thing is that Trump hasn't come close to getting a "replacement" for Obamacare. He keeps saying grand (and grandly ignorant) things. Like, "Nobody knew that health care could be so complicated." He said that we had to do health care before the tax code. As if everybody recognized that it was and obvious fact. And then his health care efforts, which didn't seem to be much of an effort at all on Trump's part, failed and he went on to taxes.

I don't think Trump has any interest at all in health care, other than his podiatrists in 1968, and his campaign mantra about "repeal and replace Obamacare." I don't know if that is a good thing or a bad thing. Trump is less likely to screw something up if he's not interested in it. But it is one of the biggest issues on the national agenda, and Trump is not competent to address it.

bagoh20 said...

Most articles from the left, even ones that try to bridge the divide in some half-assed way, always have the same fatal defect. They sound like the authors never had a single discussion with Trump voters and definitely don't know any as friends. They have no clue about what the motivations are, or the arguments. They certainly don't understand the reach Trump has. They can't even fathom that. Conservative hear the other side all day, every day, and frankly, it's mostly unhinged emotionalism sometimes hiding behind a sharp pants crease and a nicely framed credential on the wall.

FIDO said...

There was likely to be at least one reader left at the NYT who had a sense of perspective and foresight.

Alas there weren't a lot more. I am guessing it was NOT the most popular comment.

Big Mike said...

What I mean, John Henry, is that Trump hasn't overseen any true repeal of Obamacare. Repeal would require a Senate vote, which would require 60 votes for cloture. Trump has never gotten that. Not by persuasion, or negotiation, or by the force of his sparkling personality.

He was blocked by Paul Ryan and others, and defeated by John McCain and others in the Senate. Now Paul Ryan is "retired" and Republican Congress-critters who voted against AHCA are gone -- "retired" like Ryan or defeated last November like my own Representative. And McCain is dead. An intelligent person would write "Trump hasn't overseen any true repeal of Obamacare yet."

Big Mike said...

Most articles from the left, even ones that try to bridge the divide in some half-assed way, always have the same fatal defect. They sound like the authors never had a single discussion with Trump voters and definitely don't know any as friends.

Didn't David Brooks pledge to get outside New York City to meet with Trump voters? Did he ever get west of Newark?

narciso said...

How about that:

https://www.breitbart.com/border/2019/01/05/sinaloa-cartel-heir-testified-vicente-foxs-chief-bodyguard-worked-for-them/

Big Mike said...

In 2020 it's going to be "the People vs. Democrats and Never-Trumpers." I don't think Chuck is going to like the result.

Chuck said...

Big Mike said...
What I mean, John Henry, is that Trump hasn't overseen any true repeal of Obamacare. Repeal would require a Senate vote, which would require 60 votes for cloture. Trump has never gotten that. Not by persuasion, or negotiation, or by the force of his sparkling personality.

He was blocked by Paul Ryan and others, and defeated by John McCain and others in the Senate. Now Paul Ryan is "retired" and Republican Congress-critters who voted against AHCA are gone -- "retired" like Ryan or defeated last November like my own Representative. And McCain is dead. An intelligent person would write "Trump hasn't overseen any true repeal of Obamacare yet."


Paul Ryan never "blocked" any White House proposal on health care. The House was passing all kinds of repeal bills, and finally came up with a "replace" bill that was nothing at all like what Trump had promised during the campaign.

And now, we've got a House controlled by the Democrats. Good luck with that.

If you think that any true "repeal/replace" of Obamacare was ever close to a reality in the Senate, you need to study that one some more. They couldn't even get a simple majority for the AHCA in the Senate, much less 60 votes. It was a budget reconciliation bill. A parliamentary sleight-of-hand, to see how much damage could be done to Obamacare without an actual new law.



FIDO said...

We can't live like this.


Well, what are you going to do when at least a good 15% of the most important Democrats WANT to live like this, have a huge megaphone to continue to keep this front and center, and refuse to back down?


Remember, Madam Althouse, this is your party and the one you most likely voted for in the majority of the last elections. My opinion means nothing to them.

Until you and your ilk decide to make these things untenable for Democrats to do or defend, they will just keep doing it. As long as their NPC and Mexican voters keep unthinkingly voting for them, they will continue.


Now, to give you credit, your blog is SOME push back. The media defends this, the academy defends this, and the Democrats running the Federal Government defends this.

If you want some sense restored, you need to hurt them. Put away the Dylan records and the miniskirt and actually cross over to the party which is NOT attempting to destroy the rule of law and good governance.

Bleach Drinkers Curing Coronavirus Together said...

I think Trump should go for that full repeal. Throwing tens of millions of newly insured Americans out of an affordable insurance market for them will do wonders for Toupee Trump and his party in 2020. Why can't Republicans see that? Every American wants to be priced out of coverage for the life health needs so that richer Americans can have an easier time of theirs. You'd have to be a Venezuelan to not understand this.

I'm Full of Soup said...

I think Trump has delivered bigtime on the economy. Remember when all the pundits, Dem pols, Obama, etc said there was a "new normal" and we would never see 3% GDP again?

I think this was the most important thing for Trump and the Repubs to check off and they did it. GDP has been over 3% and unemployment rate is as low as ever.

bagoh20 said...

"I don't think Trump has any interest at all in health care,..."

Trump primarily cares about the same thing that every President does, and that is being regarded as a great success in the job, preferably long term. Anybody would want the same thing as President. Ask yourself, as President what would you be most concerned with?

If you are a Democrat, then accolades just require the monolithic press, entertainment, and education institutions to do what they always do, but as a Republican you better actually get results that eventually cannot be ignored. Proof? Name a Democratic President of the last 100 years that is not lionized by those institutions as a hero, regardless of scandals or failures. Conversely, many Republican Presidents are poorly regarded by even many Republicans, not to mention the three institutions named above.

Conservatives care about results, and so do Democrats when they are forced to. - Trump knows that.

I'm Full of Soup said...

I have never run into anyone who claimed their health insurance premium was affordable.

FIDO said...

The only thing that has been done legislatively to Obamacare, is some around-the-edges vandalism, as with the party-line vote on the tax bill. Obamacare can only be truly repealed via a bill passing both houses of Congress. With a majority in the House and with 60 votes to allow a vote in the Senate.


This is damning with faint praise. 'Around the edges' indeed!


The Mandate was the most legally, fiscally and culturally offensive piece of work that any politician in America has devised in my memory. Losing it CRIPPLED that miserable inept piece of legislation.


Instead of attacking Trump for failing to finish this, you should be attacking the people who made finishing this impossible.


But any cudgel to beat Trump. Did he sleep with your ex wife? I have to ask. This level of hate seems to imply some personal connection. Did your dog love him better than you? Just trying to figure this out.

FIDO said...

Does anyone know the word for a machine whose gears, and functions hurts and kills its operators as well as destroying itself? One whose very design is a failure? Seemed a perfect metaphor for Obamacare but I can't remember it

bagoh20 said...

"Throwing tens of millions of newly insured Americans out of an affordable insurance market for them will do wonders for Toupee Trump and his party in 2020. Why can't Republicans see that? Every American wants to be priced out of coverage for the life health needs so that richer Americans can have an easier time of theirs. "

Before Obamacare, the number of employees in my company who opted into the offered health insurance increased every year. Since Obamacare, and despite that we pay 60% of the premium, the number taking the insurance has shrunk every year as the cost rapidly rose and the coverage slid to a shell of what it was. Before we had a wide majority covered. Now we have less than 30%. The rest just take their chances with the county hospital. The increased number of people covered is a lie, that adds the previously uninsured without deducting the ones who voluntarily left.

Of course, as Obama and the ACA architects admitted, that failure was part of the plan.

bagoh20 said...

"Does anyone know the word for a machine whose gears, and functions hurts and kills its operators as well as destroying itself? One whose very design is a failure? Seemed a perfect metaphor for Obamacare but I can't remember it"

"Stuttering Clusterfuck of a Miserable Failure"

bagoh20 said...

"Instead of attacking Trump for failing to finish this, you should be attacking the people who made finishing this impossible."

This is so self-evident that it takes relentless bias and determination to ignore it.

narciso said...

There's a German word for this.

hstad said...

Chuck said...~Just ask John Edwards whether similar acts are "criminal" or "civil."
1/6/19, 8:44 AM

Chuck you are nothing but a 'blowhard'. John Edwards was found "not guilty" of one charge by a jury and a mistrial has been declared on the other five counts. Furthermore, the prosecution decided not to go for a second trial since the jurors where all leaning in Edwards direction on the other five counts. The F.E.C. determined that Edwards did not violate the law. Therefore, what you have pointed out on Edwards is pure 'hyperbole' or in the real world an out and out lie. But since you're an attorney why should we be surprised about your lies.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2012/05/john-edwards-was-found-not-guilty-on-one-of-six-charges-and-jury-hung-on-the-rest.html

FullMoon said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Lydia said...

That Trump has and is inciting the tyranny of the masses is not grounds for impeachment.

Maybe not, but what a throwaway line.

Jack Klompus said...

"Blogger President Pee-Pee Tape said...
I think Trump should go for that full repeal."

I think Ritmo should go for drinking a bottle of antifreeze and putting his retarded face into the path of a rotary saw.

Chuck said...

hstad:

It is true -- as I already stated -- that Edwards was indicted, taken to trial, and was found not guilty on one charge and the jury was hung on the five remaining counts. Leading to a mistrial. It is true that federal prosecutors determined to not undertake a second trial on the remaining counts.

That all points to evidentiary problems, not criminal-charge problems. In the Edwards case (as I have mentioned, but which you ignored), they had nothing like the vast body of written and electronic communications, and the close/insider prosecution witnesses as exist with Cohen and Trump and Pecker.

Also, I think that you are wrong in asserting that "[t]he FEC determined that Edwards did not violate the law." I don't think that the FEC made such a determination at all on the charges against Edwards. The FEC did issue several advisory opinions in the early 2000's that had a bearing on the charges. And the FEC did audit the Edwards campaign. But the FEC did not audit the payments in question because they had not been properly reported.

And your link to Slate.com is interesting; you might be the first Althouse commenter to approvingly link to Slate.com, and especially the left-wing legal commentator Emily Bazelon. Bazelon went to the left's favorite election law expert, Rick Hasen. You want to know what that same Rick Hasen thinks about the seriousness of the potential charges against Trump in connection with Michael Cohen's guilty plea? No, you don't.

By the way -- and this is funny -- one of my own personal favorite election law experts is Hans A. von Spakovsky of Heritage. And von Spakovsky was out there saying that Edwards was guilty of campaign finance violations. And now, von Spakovsky is saying that Trump probably did not violate any campaign finance laws. He is one of those movement conservatives who had nothing good to say about Donald Trump before the 2016 election but who is now joined the Trump Party.

So now I have taken the time to address your comment directly and meaningfully. But you called me a liar, when you know not one thing about me. I will be careful about ever bothering to reply to you again.

FullMoon said...

Chuck says_
"I will be careful about ever bothering to reply to you again."


You Lie !

Gk1 said...

I have been excommunicated from a liberal friends FB group for laying it out to them the same way 6 months ago. I didn't vote for him and have problems with how he does his job but think all of the efforts thus far are nothing but a poorly thought out coup. Even liberals that I thought had a grasp of reality were baying for impeachment and became even more aggravated when I asked them to list the counts, hence my dismissal from polite liberal company. Although recently I think I am finally seeing some cracks of reason erupt on the left when they are now opining it may make more sense to focus on ejecting him by secret ballot in 2020.

Achilles said...

Chuck said...
“Yes, John Henry, I took Trump at his word. He hasn't delivered, he could never deliver and I think that only fools would ever have believed him.“

Trump tried to fix it.

Traitors named flake and corker and McCain betrayed their voters.

Traitors like you.

Nobody likes traitors.

Bruce Hayden said...

I had an interesting discussion recently with a good friend of mine from the left. He should know better with an economics degree and his MBA from Chicago, where he took economics from the Chicago School profs as electives, but instead, he railed on about single payer, and how much better foreign single payer systems were than esp the abortion forced upon us by Obama, Palsi, and Reid. Wish that Dr K were still participating here, because he seems to have far better information about the problems with those foreign single payer systems than this good friend does, despite claiming to have studied it a lot. And, then just know I was reading the latest Freakonomics book (Christmas present from my kid), and they pointed out the obvious. Our healthcare system (esp after Obamacare was imposed over it) shares, but isn't as bad as those national single payer systems, the basic economic problem that supply and demand are effectively decoupled. They got shutdown by a former UK PM after proposing a system that starts with giving everyone cash at the beginning of the year. There is a gap at the bottom of total medical expenses every year, followed by coinsurance for a bit, and then 100% coverage for anything catastrophic. They predict that the effect would be to greatly reduce low value, nonessential, healthcare. Instead, of course, Obamacare mandates significant low value healthcare, which few would chose to insure against, the list of which was a political, and not a medical efficacy decision. That is one of the big problems with national single payer, or national systems (like ours) where coverage levels are centrally politically decided, that a lot of what is supplied or mandated is a result of political, and not economic decisions. This means that the decisions on what is being paid for is made by partisans after being lobbied by those willing to spend the most buying lobbyists. Same reason that central governments can't do much of anything economically.

It would be nice if Trump and a Republican Congress could have repealed Obamacare, but they weren't able to. I think that in the Senate they just didn't have enough votes. That stolen Senate seat in the AL special election may have been the key. One or two dissidents could thwart any possible deal, and likely did. Now with the House flipped, nothing is going to happen until at least 2021, with both parties trying to flip the house that they don't control (I actually expect both to flip - Republicans have a lot more seats at stake in the Senate in 2020 (esp thanks to all of the Senate seats that the Dems were able to buy or steal last Nov) and the Dems are going batshit crazy in the House), as well as the Presidency. Two things are different now though. First, there is no longer any financial penalty for not participating in Obamacare, which means that it will accelerate being hollowed out, effectively moving towards a system mostly for the otherwise uninsurable. And the most inane and insane coverage mandates are being removed. And I think that I could live with that if we could again purchase healthcare outside of the Exchanges, and their required coverages and failing economics (talking theoretically, since I am on Medicare). I don't really expect things to have progressed to the point in 2020 that either party could make a compelling electoral argument for their preferred system, but I think that we very likely might be there in 2024,unless Trump loses in 2020 for other reasons.

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

Obamacare sucks and nobody can afford it. But - the loyal cultist democratic proggies sing its very praises - right on RAchel Maddow's Q.

rehajm said...

He should know better with an economics degree and his MBA from Chicago, where he took economics from the Chicago School profs as electives

After the ACA...from one of those Chicago economists he didn't listen to.

Achilles said...

Ocasio Cortez wants to tax misogynists, i.e. people who disagree with her, 100%.

She is just another fascist piece of shit.

We will never let these tyrannical shitheads have power over us. It is clear they are just enemies of freedom.

Castro’s grandson is showing us how Cuba’s leaders live.

YoungHegelian said...

It's probably a good idea not to take the Democratic pundits baying for impeachment at their word as their true reasons.

It's not that Trump should be impeached because he's illegal, immoral, & fattening. Trump should be impeached because he's actually quite successful at using the powers of the Executive Branch to do stuff that the Left doesn't want to see done. As has been pointed out in many articles before, Trump has been very successful at pushing through a conservative agenda.

walter said...

"That Trump has and is inciting the tyranny of the masses is not grounds for impeachment. Again, I am not a big fan of Trump."

Ya think?

Original Mike said...

Chuck said..."I am afraid you are mistaking me for someone who has an interest in fair treatment of Donald Trump. I'm not your guy. I am interested in smearing him, hurting him and prejudicing people against him."

It's not working. Surely you can see it's not working and, indeed, is counterproductive. I am at a loss to understand your behavior. It is not rational which, I suppose, points to the explanation.

rehajm said...

According to Vermonters Vermont is the model for the nation on universal healthcare. Their program lasted less than a year as the first year cost exceeded the value of the state's entire annual budget.

Achilles said...

Ocasio-Cortez’s supporters want to kill her political opponents.

She is a fascist leader of a fascist movement.

Disgusting people.

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

Leftists never change. Tax raping the masses to make government rich, it's all they dream about. Destroying the private sector is the big goal. Everyone of us must be a slave to our bureaucratic-fascistic betters.

Punitive tax rates for the common good.

The only corporations left to survive will be the Twitter-Polis.

bagoh20 said...

" Their program lasted less than a year as the first year cost exceeded the value of the state's entire annual budget."

As I'm sure was warned against by opponents, not to mention it was clear in the numbers in advance.

That's what's scary about the left. Even good arguments, numbers, history, and science cannot force them to even consider being wrong with their fantasies of cost free indulgences.

California was considering a similarly bankrupting and essentially crazy proposal. Some more reasonable Democrats killed it, but they had to fight enough of these insane irresponsible fanatics to envision a time when they would get what they want and the destruction they can't yet imagine.

FIDO said...

Chuck said..."I am afraid you are mistaking me for someone who has an interest in fair treatment of Donald Trump. I'm not your guy. I am interested in smearing him, hurting him and prejudicing people against him."

So you are against fairness. You admit to what everyone accuses you of and yet deny it.

And if you are unfair to Trump, you are probably unfair to others.

You aren't any kind of Republican or Conservative I want to be associated with and I wish we could throw you out of the party.

You are Sean Hannity with a goatee from the Mirror Universe.

WintersTale said...

"Even good arguments, numbers, history, and science cannot force them to even consider being wrong with their fantasies"

This is about Trump and his cult, right?

Achilles said...

Original Mike said...
Chuck said..."I am afraid you are mistaking me for someone who has an interest in fair treatment of Donald Trump. I'm not your guy. I am interested in smearing him, hurting him and prejudicing people against him."

It's not working. Surely you can see it's not working and, indeed, is counterproductive. I am at a loss to understand your behavior. It is not rational which, I suppose, points to the explanation.

The cuck wing of the Democrat party was always a sham. If Romney had won in 2012 he would have passed cap and trade and amnesty.

Romneycare would have been enshrined permanently. McCains only purpose was to betray his voters and give cuck traitors like Chuck ammunition to attack the people like trump who actually do what his voters want.

The only people worse than the fascists like Ocasio Cortez are the traitors who pretend to be Republicans to push romneycare open borders and stupid wars.

Howard said...

Triggered much? You people are pathetic. Achilles pts is the only acceptable excuse. The rest are purpose driven to insanity.

Seeing Red said...

"That Trump has and is inciting the tyranny of the masses is not grounds for impeachment. Again, I am not a big fan of Trump."


Lolol.

Trump got in because of the tyranny of the self-anointed elites.

Unknown said...

Funny how the commenter skips over "if you like your doctor you can keep your doctor. If you like your plan you can keep your plan."

Or "I did not have sex with that woman, Ms. Lewinsky".

See, it's only Republican Presidents who lie...

Unknown said...

Chuck said "Absolutely everyone would like a plan, if one existed, that lowered costs, lowered premiums, covered everyone and provided great care. With no cuts to Social Security, Medicare or Medicaid. Trump promised all of that, and has not done so much as propose a plan that would do all of that."
********************************

"Absolutely everyone"---especially Life-Long Republicans---would like a government takeover of our healthcare system.

Once again you reveal yourself to be a fraud. LLR, indeed!!!

snort!

Jim at said...

Throwing tens of millions of newly insured Americans out of an affordable insurance market for them will do wonders for Toupee Trump and his party in 2020. - Ritmo

I never read your shit because you're insane. But, this is beyond idiocy. Your Precious President already threw tens of millions out of an affordable insurance market, you stupid, stupid ass.

Howard said...

Jay: you don't need a subscription for Flonase any more. Costco is your friend.

Big Mike said...

@Bruce Hayden, next time ask your friend to research whether there is any such thing as a single payer system that does not ration access to healthcare by age.

Original Mike said...

"...is any such thing as a single payer system that does not ration access to healthcare by age."

Hard to imagine there is any support for Medicare-for-All in the 60+ cohort.

Big Mike said...

Hard to imagine there is any support for Medicare-for-All in the 60+ cohort

Or among working doctors. I understand that the Medicare payments often do not cover the full cost of the service rendered.

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 235   Newer› Newest»