October 2, 2019

“As I learn more and more each day, I am coming to the conclusion that what is taking place is not an impeachment, it is a COUP, intended to take away the Power of the....”

“....People, their VOTE, their Freedoms, their Second Amendment, Religion, Military, Border Wall, and their God-given rights as a Citizen of The United States of America!”

Trump tweets his framing of the impeachment story.

(Sorry for not linking, but I’m having trouble linking to tweets this morning.)

Impeachment is part of the Constitution. How can using that provision be a coup? It can only succeed if the people support using it, and Trump’s opponents are trying to convince the people it’s what they want. Trump is trying to convince the people it’s not what they want, and one of the ways to do that is to portray impeachment as improper — a usurpation of power, like a coup. So, to put the idea “coup” into people’s head is just a way to fight against the impeachment movement.

Trump is also broadening the meaning of the impeachment. It’s not about the Ukraine phone call, it’s about all the things America loves — it’s about FREEDOM. He’s asking to be seen as the embodiment of the great-again America and pushing us to feel that to lose him would be to lose all that we hold dear.

174 comments:

rhhardin said...

Trump is listing the things that the deep state opposes that the people favored. That's in line with taking away their vote, which is what constitutes a coup.

It's against the sovereign people, not against Trump. Trump doesn't care if he's president - he does better for himself if he's not - except for patriotism.

Robert Cook said...

Sounds like something his people have fed him to Tweet.

exhelodrvr1 said...

Pretty clearly the activities by "the Resistance" which have brought us to this point are highly inappropriate at best, illegal at worst. And none of his actions, no matter how much you disagree with them, are in the "high crimes and misdemeanours" category. That's how.

rhhardin said...

I don't care for any of Trump's rhetoric, except that it's always written to make the leftist media show themselves as completely trivial. It's written for them, not me. They in turn know that their audience will like their coverage.

It's zinger appreciation, tailored to ruin the enemy news coverage.

Because the media audience is becoming a majority that hates them. That's how Trump ruins it.

cubanbob said...

He has a point. The Democrats are trying to nullify the 2016 election using impeachment as a vehicle and alleging Trump committed prior to and while in office that have been already investigated and found lacking.

Kovacs said...

Trump's claim that he's "learn[ing] more and more each day" suggests that this is one of his ironic or "comical" tweets.

rhhardin said...

Trump isn't seeking to embody values. He's seeking to assert them in government. Against huge opposition.

Any other Trump would do as well, but nobody sees one on the horizon.

You can't run the country without gentlemen's agreements, and those are what the left undermines.

Look at Trump with the dictators - building up gentlemen's agreements. A huge positive.

Mark said...

He is trying to frame it like Walker did the recall as an illegitimate use of the power to remove.

I do not think it will work but they are clearly trying every tactic

Amadeus 48 said...

Impeachment has always been there. It isn't a coup. It's just stupid.

It blew up in the GOP's face with Clinton. Nixon would never have jumped off the deck if he hadn't recorded himself.

We can expect to see a lot more of this unless the Dems are administered an historic defeat in the aftermath.

rhhardin said...

Sounds like something his people have fed him to Tweet.

It's composed to set off the opposition, not to mollify soap opera women. Trump is the author.

Trump's people have only the mollify talent, not the zinger talent.

rehajm said...

...it's just that we've never used impeachment as revenge for losing. We've never used "impeachment" as revenge for losing, either.

There's a process for impeachment but "Impeachment" doesn't seem to be part of the Constitution.

"Impeachment" sure smells like coup to me...

Oso Negro said...

There was some link on Instapundit this morning about this really being an impeachment of the President by the Executive Branch. I think that's about right. The Federal Government, excepting enlisted folk in the Marines and Army, are 90+ percent Democrats. As a result, very little really changes. We either need to return to the spoils system or move the Federal offices to places so profoundly unpleasant that progressives would never want to live there.

rhhardin said...

Remember Trump was after finding out what happened in 2016, in the coup plans; not beating up on Biden.

He sees it as a threat to the nation.

Hagar said...

This "impeachment" does not seem to be coming about in the regular way.
The 3 previous attempts were based on incontrovertible crimes or political misdeed (in Johnson's case) committed by the President. There was no spying on the internal workings of the White House, make believe dossiers, searching high and low for something, anything, that could be portrayed as a "high crime or misdemeanor" by twisting the meaning of words by squads of lawyers, etc., etc.

narciso said...


Just some elements:

https://thefederalist.com/2019/10/01/new-evidence-suggests-prosecutors-pressured-michael-flynn-to-lie/

traditionalguy said...

The point that Trump is making is that the Media and the Dems are using the Impeachment Remedy intended for High Crimes ans Misdemeanors as if it's simply a Vote of No Confidence in a Parliamentary System. So that is a coup against the President in the American Constitution, while it would just be politics as usual in the British Government.

henry said...

firearms are in the Constitution. How can using one be a crime?

Yes legal mechanisms such as "impeachment" (is it impeachment if the house doesn't vote?) can be used for illicit purposes such as a coup.

have some coffee and try again.

rehajm said...

If he's removed form office through impeachment or "impeachment" it certainly lessens the gravitas of impeachment since impeachment will be part of every future President's resume, so long as the vote count is right...

rehajm said...

I still kind of value the idea that elections matter. Certainly the last one did. Hopefully it's not the last one that matters...

Kevin said...

Impeachment is regime suicide:

“The old saying is that if you strike at a king, be sure to kill him. In this case, the regime is striking not a king but at the very idea that an elected official can challenge the establishment. This risks revealing just how weak the country’s ruling class really is: if 40 percent of the country remains with Trump through the ordeal of impeachment, that will show that 40 percent is anti-regime — revolutions are made with less. And that 40 percent would be a floor, not a ceiling; a starting point for a future anti-regime movement.”

https://spectator.us/impeachment-regime-suicide/

Churchy LaFemme: said...

Impeachment is part of the Constitution. How can using that provision be a coup?

The 25th is part of the Constitution as well, but using it to remove Trump would be a coup de facto if not de jure.

The devil can quote scripture..

wendybar said...

He's not wrong. The Mueller Report and all the other investigations are turning up wrongdoings of the intel community....not Trump. What are they really looking for? I bet they would find it in Hillarys missing E-mails.

JML said...

Semantics and nuances aside, he's right. Dems are off the deep end and will do anything and everything to weaken and destroy Trump to gain power. They have allies in the Republican Party and establishment and at all levels of the Government bureaucracy. After seeing all of this, the only conclusion is that the way politicians get rich is through good ol' boy corruption and both sides are neck deep in it. They fear the exposure and loss of power, privilege and riches. They disgust me and democrats and republicans that support this disgust me.

Laslo Spatula said...

"Impeachment is part of the Constitution. How can using that provision be a coup?"

Maybe because they have been talking impeachment since before he even took office, and have yet to state exactly what crime they are using the provision for.

They have put the coup before the horse.

I am Laslo.

chuck said...

This argument doesn't work for me. It is pretty clear that impeachment is being used as a political tool, and the fact that it is in the Constitution doesn't imbue it with magical legitimacy. There is no inherent reason that it cannot be used to undermine the government as set up by the Constitution, indeed, the Founders were aware that it was a dangerous tool. Justifying its use is what lawyers are for and they will always make a case. It is their job.

D. said...

Six ways to Sunday? Intelligence chiefs not only altered rules about firsthand knowledge to file whistleblower report...

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/10/six_ways_to_sunday_intelligence_chiefs_not_only_altered_rules_about_firsthand_knowledge_to_file_whistleblower_report.html

Larry J said...

I've been calling it a coup attempt for 2 years because that's exactly what it is. The people responsible for this should be tracked down, charged, and if convicted, sentenced to very lengthy prison terms.

cacimbo said...

Sure looks like Trump has been the target of ongoing coup attempt since he took office.Is there a word for the opposite of "jury nullification" where the jury (Congress) vote guilty because they dislike Trump whether there is evidence of a crime or not.

320Busdriver said...

As Sweizer said on Levin on Sunday, “Trump represents a massive disruption to the “corrupt” business model of Washington DC where you juice in your family, you juice in your friends , you come out rich and then you cash in even further. Trump threatens all of that and so he is targeted by people on both sides of the spectrum.

If it is not possible to investigate Joe Biden now, then it is NEVER possible to investigate him.

Fernandinande said...

I have some problems believing that there's something improper about investigating corrupt US politicians with the help of foreign countries which are involved in the corruption and which also have crime-fighting treaties with the US, if the corrupt politicians happen to be political opponents.

SDaly said...

It can be a coup if non-elected government officials, in conjunction with members of one political faction, set up fake evidence and then the political faction proceeded to impeach based upon fake evidence while excluding political participation from the other side.

What does the process of impeachment being in the Constitution have to do with how to characterize the abuse and misuse of that process?

rehajm said...

Sounds like something his people have fed him to Tweet.

Of course Cookie intends this to be a sharp critique of Trump but if it were true the left and right could be celebrating having someone intervene on Trump's tweets. Careful what you wish for...

Given the number of players coordinating communications for team lawfare/Deep State/leftie media I have no problem with a little help for Trump's side, either...

I Callahan said...

Sorry, professor, but it most certainly is a coup. Using legal means to attempt a coup is something that has happened throughout history, so the fact that impeachment is part of the constitution means nothing.

whitney said...

It's been a coup from the beginning. They tried to keep him out of office and the moment he got in they've been working to get him out. Mifsud

Dave Begley said...

It is a coup as there is no factual basis for the House impeachment. The House hasn't even voted to begin an inquiry!

It is a runaway Dem train. You can see and hear the excitement they have.

Mike Sylwester said...

The situation now is that Nancy Pelosi -- one person -- has declared "an impeachment inquiry" so that House Democrats can obtain grand-jury testimony, tax returns, White House papers and other documents and testimony that normally are protected by privacy rules.

Is that part of the Constitution?

Another part of the situation is that hearsay statements from anonymous individuals are being used to justify Pelosi's one-person declaration, which enables House Democrats to obtain such documents and testimony?

Is that part of the Constitution?

=======

Laws against abortion were eliminated because the US Constitution -- in its emanations and penumbra -- guarantees citizens' privacy.

However, now anybody's -- not just the President's -- private tax returns can be obtained by this process:

1) An anonymous "whistle blower" makes hearsay accusations.

2) The House Speaker declares "an impeachment inquiry"

3) The House Democrats demand the tax returns of the President -- and of any other person.

The same procedure is used to obtain grand-jury testimony, White House papers and any other documents that the House Democrats want to snoop through.

Is that part of the US Constitution?

daskol said...

I agree with his framing because the Ukraine call is merely the latest pretext his opponents are using to assail him, and because of the shady way in which this "whistleblower" complaint was created and facilitated from within the Executive. Impeachment by Congress is in the Constitution. The last few impeachments, from Nixon to Clinton to Trump, were all initiated from within the Executive branch. The Administrative State, or the Deep State, using whistleblower and other protections to prevent an elected president from taking office and executing the prerogatives of his office is what we've witnessed since Trump won the election. Seen in the context of the articles announcing impeachment before Trump was sworn in, and as a continuation of a process initiated by the previous administration, attempted coup makes sense. Simplest way to put it is that a large portion of the country has not accepted the results of the 2016 election, and from the Russia hoax to this latest kerfuffle, have been attempting to use every means to undo it.

I Callahan said...

Trump also seems to be presuming that Vice President Pence — who would assume the Presidency in the event that Trump was removed — would not stand for religious freedom or Second Amendment rights or border security or any of the rest of what might be regarded as a Trump platform (as if one exists).

No, that's not what he's presuming at all. YOU'RE presuming that Pence wouldn't be getting the same treatment if he were president. But Pence isn't Trump, and OrangeManBad, so nothing else matters to you.

Sebastian said...

"How can using that provision be a coup?"

When it is a baseless attack. In other words, "a usurpation of power."

Since the attack is carried out by people who dis the actual Constitution in any other context, the notion that there's anything "constitutional" about it is also pretty cynical.

Anyway, Althouse, word games aside, and before you retreat to the OED, are you still "neutral"?

daskol said...

This is way bigger than Trump. Americans voted for regime change in 2016, and the regime has been fighting to nullify that election ever since. It appears we'll have to vote again for regime change in 2020 in order to make that point stick. In that respect, what we're going through resembles the Brexit referendum and its aftermath in the UK.

MountainMan said...

"Once set, the example of impeaching a President for what, when the excitement of the hour shall have subsided, will be regarded as insufficient causes, as several of those now alleged against the President were decided to be by the House of Representatives only a few months since, and no future President will be safe who happens to differ with a majority of the House and two thirds of the Senate on any measure deemed by them important, particularly if of a political character. Blinded by partisan zeal, with such an example before them, they will not scruple to remove out of the way any obstacle to the accomplishment of their purposes, and what then becomes of the checks and balances of the Constitution, so carefully devised and so vital to its perpetuity? They are all gone."

Senator Lyman Trumbull of Illinois, who voted to acquit Andrew Johnson in 1868

Darrell said...

It's a coup attempt. Just getting my vote in.

Commenters have already made the points I would have made.

Darrell said...

They want Pence gone, too. If Trump is ever impeached, Pence would be the next to go--if they think he could get elected in 2020.

rhhardin said...

Althouse is protecting the woman's prerogative to dislike Trump.

Howard said...

Nice to see all you people on the same exact narrative. It must be comforting in your hour of dankness.

Beasts of England said...

Coup seems like a perfectly cromulent term given the coordinated manner in which the so-called whistleblower brought forth a hearsay complaint.

Eric said...

Nats win! Nats win!

Jeff Brokaw said...

Althouse: “Trump tweets his framing of the impeachment story, as framed by me.”

FIFY.

Unknown said...

Yes, all in all I believe it is part of a "deep state" coup. Feels ridiculous writing that, but it is what I estimate the totality of the Russia business and all of the other machinations to be.

Powerful people within the the three branches of government an are reinforcing one another's efforts to overturn the outcome of the last presidential election. Silicon Valley and most of the media naturally abet their efforts.

I'm 63 and just want things to hold together until I exit the stage. I wont call an individual with a penis and/or the genetics of a man a woman either. Unless, of course my income is threatened or my fellow Portlanders begin to torment my wife's employer and etc.

It's an element in a coup, impeachment is.

For what it's worth I don't listen to the President speak nor follow his use of social media. Before his presidency if he was on television or in a magazine I always ignored or escaped. Still do pretty much.

whitney said...

The other interesting thing about the slow-motion coup is the power player in dc thought it would be easy because they assumed Trump would be as corrupt as they are. Or at the very least as corrupt in the same way and it would be easy to find something on him. It only shows you how corrupt all of them are. Every last Power Player in Washington can be blackmailed by someone above them. It's much like bergoglio at the Vatican surrounding himself by blackmailable people. If anyone gets out of line they can just bring the hammer down.

Howard said...

You guys seem to get off on hysterical, it as if you are the mirror image of the #metoo movement. Your toxic femininity is showing

traditionalguy said...

Wake up and smell the roses. The Mid Terms election shifted a part of Parliamentary majority over to the Dems. And now they demand a vote requiring the Prime Minister's Government to resign.

That Constitution Thingee, as the Brit Piers Morgan sees it, is irrelevant to our new British overlords. Why wait 4 years to throw out the Government? That is too Jacksonian. Just arrange a corrupt bargain and get a John Quincy Adams to preserve the Brit's Federal Reserve Bank that is Trump's declared enemy of the people.

Unknown said...

then the only way to make america great again is to re-elect him...

pious agnostic said...

Impeachment is politics.

Twitter is politics by other means.

bleh said...

Impeachment may be in the Constitution, and therefore is a legitimate power of Congress, but what if the power is being exercised on the basis of lies and is totally concocted or manipulated by the president’s opponents? Aren’t there some circumstances where they power is abused so badly that it’s appropriate to call it a coup? What if it’s based entirely on a fraud or forged evidence?

Howard said...

Trump gets his "learning" listening to you people: from your assholes to Trump's mouth. Now we know why Melenoma won't kiss him on the mouth

sdharms said...

and Trump is right. If secret courts (FISA) and lying to the court, and hearsay used as whistleblowing and black is white, white is black -- is successful against Trump, what hope to you and I have that it wont be used against us? to deny us the ability to use a credit card, to buy food, to own a home, etc. ?

virgil xenophon said...

Oso Negro@7:09AM/

"We either need to return to the spoils system or move Federal offices..."

Funny, I was pondering the exact same thing recently--and for exactly the same reasons.

MacMacConnell said...

It's been a planned coup attempt since before he was elected, "insurance".

Bushman of the Kohlrabi said...

No need to worry. The ABC news reporter on the radio this morning assured me it wasn't a coup.

Mike Sylwester said...

Kevin at 7:14 AM
https://spectator.us/impeachment-regime-suicide/

That article is superb

I especially liked these passages:

... Trump’s enemies ... have wrongly assumed that a healthy, old-fashioned, pro-establishment consensus must emerge out of sheer revulsion at Trump. Hence all the appeals on the part of anti-Trump pundits to Republican decency and conscience. They assume that, deep down, for all that Republicans are racists and deplorables, they still love the regime, and they will support it over Trump.

In fact, for most Republicans, certainly at the grassroots, the voice of conscience and their sense of decency command them to support Trump, in spite of his sins, against an absolutely illegitimate and malevolent regime.

Impeachment is a regime counter-attack against a man elected to bring about change. ​And while impeachment is certainly constitutional, it is an elite procedure not a democratic one. ....

The failure of the Trump impeachment will deepen the divisions of 2016 and sharpen the question of regime legitimacy. A mistaken premise — overestimation of support for the ruling class and their rules — will lead to the regime losing rather than gaining credibility. ...

The moderate path here is the one that eschews impeachment and instead shows that the elite still has faith in elections. Let the voters decide whether they want to defend the ‘norms’ of the regime, and even if they decide not to — by re-electing Trump — the regime will have lost less credibility than it stands to through a failed attempt at impeachment.

Legitimacy is bleeding away from American politics and society, and Trump is a symptom not the cause. The cause is the folly of America’s leadership class as a whole. Electing Trump was the public’s way of impeaching that class.

William said...

Don’t be pedantic, Professor. It doesn’t become you … or anybody.

Unknown said...

It’s a coup in the sense the Dems have been plotting impeachment from the day of the election. High crimes and misdemeanors to be invented later.

Clyde said...

He's not wrong. He's had all of the Deep State plotters sabotaging his presidency from Day One. In a just world, those people would be pilloried in the stocks in the public square, being pelted with rotten vegetables. Instead, they're on CNN and MSNBC or writing books.

chickelit said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Professional lady said...

What Darrell said.

Bruce Hayden said...

“The old saying is that if you strike at a king, be sure to kill him. In this case, the regime is striking not a king but at the very idea that an elected official can challenge the establishment. This risks revealing just how weak the country’s ruling class really is: if 40 percent of the country remains with Trump through the ordeal of impeachment, that will show that 40 percent is anti-regime — revolutions are made with less. And that 40 percent would be a floor, not a ceiling; a starting point for a future anti-regime movement.”

Esp when that 40% is much more heavily armed than the rest of the country. My guess is that 40% has over 80% of the guns in this country.

chickelit said...

The obvious Constitutional remedy to replace Trump is to field a better candidate -- one who wins not just a mere popular majority but also an Electoral College Majority.

By the way, I recently went to a California DMV to change my address and also my voter registration/affiliation. I was shocked at the language used regarding voting rights and citizenship. Let me paraphrase in a schiffty way: "For purposes of voting are you a US Citizen?
(a) Yes
(b) No
(c) Decline to answer.

Personally, I am glad to see the California candidate getting her ass kicked by the rest of the nation. Reject her and her ilk if you know what's good for you.

Anonymous said...

"They have put the coup before the horse.

I am Laslo."

Golf clap.

Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...

The democrat party is corrupt. From top to bottom.

narayanan said...

My Q: Why is impeachment not a coup?

Coup d'etat >>> strike of state >>> not clear at , by or for

Does distinction hold with (un)written, or no constitution?

Coup d'etat don't have recipe or procedure
Impeachment has color of law/constitution

Koot Katmandu said...

I think Coup is appropriate here. Look at the Russia collusion investigation. I can not see how anyone could NOT conclude that the DOJ and the SC where setting up an Obstruction trap for PDT when they knew there was no original crime to obstruct. SC Mueller had to know there was no collusion from all most day one. Mueller ignored too much done on the other side.

Then look at the Dossier paid for by the DNC and Clinton campaign. Anyone that call this person a whistle blower is lying IMHO. A whistle blower would no first hand what was said. This whole thing wreaks - First accuse BK on the supreme court with out evidence and now accuse PDT with out evidence - heard it from someone. Looks like the same old same old. Start and investigation for non crime and then charge obstruction. Sure looks like that is where this is headed again. Obstruction the congress investigation into the call

Gabriel said...

The framers of the Constitution appear to have known all about how impeachment could potentially be abused, and seem to have thought they did everything in their power to minimize the possibility as far as was reasonable, see Federalist 65:

"A well-constituted court for the trial of impeachments is an object not more to be desired than difficult to be obtained in a government wholly elective. The subjects of its jurisdiction are those offenses which proceed from the misconduct of public men, or, in other words, from the abuse or violation of some public trust. They are of a nature which may with peculiar propriety be denominated POLITICAL, as they relate chiefly to injuries done immediately to the society itself. The prosecution of them, for this reason, will seldom fail to agitate the passions of the whole community, and to divide it into parties more or less friendly or inimical to the accused. In many cases it will connect itself with the pre-existing factions, and will enlist all their animosities, partialities, influence, and interest on one side or on the other; and in such cases there will always be the greatest danger that the decision will be regulated more by the comparative strength of parties, than by the real demonstrations of innocence or guilt...

"...it ought not to be forgotten that the demon of faction will, at certain seasons, extend his sceptre over all numerous bodies of men.

But though one or the other of the substitutes which have been examined, or some other that might be devised, should be thought preferable to the plan in this respect, reported by the convention, it will not follow that the Constitution ought for this reason to be rejected. If mankind were to resolve to agree in no institution of government, until every part of it had been adjusted to the most exact standard of perfection, society would soon become a general scene of anarchy, and the world a desert. Where is the standard of perfection to be found? Who will undertake to unite the discordant opinions of a whole commuity, in the same judgment of it; and to prevail upon one conceited projector to renounce his INFALLIBLE criterion for the FALLIBLE criterion of his more CONCEITED NEIGHBOR? To answer the purpose of the adversaries of the Constitution, they ought to prove, not merely that particular provisions in it are not the best which might have been imagined, but that the plan upon the whole is bad and pernicious."

Amexpat said...

Impeachment in not even close to being a coup. First, impeachment doesn't remove the POTUS from office, it's an indictment that's passed over to the Senate.

Second, it's up to the house to define "High Crimes and Misdemeanors" and the Senate has to agree with that with a 2/3 majority. That's not a small cabal of usurpers that quickly and illegally grab power, as is done in a coup

Third, there is nothing undemocratic about a majority of the House and 2/3 of the Senate deciding to remove a POTUS. That's a constitutional check on the the President's power.

That said, I think the House is overreaching on impeachment at this point, but it's their constitutional right to be foolish.

Leland said...

Setting aside the impeachment; I think rendering judicial decisions that one President's executive order can't override a previous President's executive order, because the latter "didn't provide legitimate rational for the order" is extra constitutional.

But lets not pretend this is an impeachment, because such was not voted on by the House. A closed door meeting was held and out of it came a concept not explained by the Constitution: an inquiry. Supposedly this gives the right to one party in the House to subpoena whatever they want and the Executive Branch must hand it over. This is as fool hardy as California believing it could demand Trump's tax returns. It's not an impeachment. You want a constitutional impeachment, hold an open vote on the House floor and present your case.

As for the Whistleblower; they may be protected; but whoever leaked the information of a classified conversation to them has violated the law. Then again, I think we may find the same people involved in the whistleblower activities to have worked with Misfud.

chickelit said...

Chuck said...
Trump also seems to be presuming that Vice President Pence — who would assume the Presidency in the event that Trump was removed — would not stand for religious freedom or Second Amendment rights or border security or any of the rest of what might be regarded as a Trump platform (as if one exists).

That's just not a valid assumption, Chuck. Trump could be assuming that Democrats would go after a President Pence for exactly the same reasons and would once again threaten any stance for religious freedom or Second Amendment rights or border security. Dems would be emboldened by a successful coup against Trump and would continue somehow until they got a President Pelosi.

Michael K said...

Trump also seems to be presuming that Vice President Pence — who would assume the Presidency in the event that Trump was removed — would not stand for religious freedom

Chuck, Pence has already failed that test as Governor. The Indiana Legislature passed RFRA when he was Governor and, after the usual hysteria by the left with threats of boycotts, he revoked it and surrendered. Pence is not a strong advocate.

Nice to see you back even if you are, as usual, wrong.

Bruce Hayden said...

I agree with his framing because the Ukraine call is merely the latest pretext his opponents are using to assail him, and because of the shady way in which this "whistleblower" complaint was created and facilitated from within the Executive. Impeachment by Congress is in the Constitution.

Keep in mind here that both the ODNI and DOJ OLC have determined that the IC IG lacked jurisdiction to initiate this complaint, since it involved foreign relations, and not the IC. Moreover, the ICIG is intentionally ignoring that the complaint is likely prima facie evidence of an Espionage Act violation on the part of, at a minimum, the first party or parties who leaked classified (Automatically classified Secret) information to the alleged whistleblower, who had no legitimate Need To Know. Moreover, the “whistleblower” relayed his complaint to the House and Senate Intelligence Committee chairs, without legal justification (since, again, the conversation involved foreign relations, and not intelligence gathering). The only thing that would possibly keep him from having committed his own Espionage Act violations there is that his complaint was not that close to the actual transcript of what was said in Trump’s call with the Ukrainian President. Thus, he may only be guilty of the inchoate crime of attempting to misuse classified information. As noted, instead of filing criminal complaints for these Espionage Act violations, the ICIG is aiding the Deep State trying to destroy the President who nominated him for the job.

ConradBibby said...

It's not a coup; it's WORSE. An actual, traditional coup would at least be honest and forthright. Some folks with guns would storm the presidential palace and announce that it was time for the incumbent to go. The country's people and institutions would see what had taken place and decide whether or not it was justified and whether or not to oppose it. As others here have observed, the present machinations in Washington are designed to topple from power a constitutionally-elected president. However, while they purport to act in accordance with the letter and spirit of the Constitution, the people doing the toppling have intentionally abandoned basic notions of fairness and due process in pursuit of a predetermined result. Given that they all swore to defend the Constitution, their actions are not only subversive but craven and hypocritical to boot.

Ralph L said...

I see Trump as more of a flashy-convertible or limo man.

Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...

7:37 - Mike S.

Indeed. Where in the Constitution, that Nancy uses to justify her impeachment inquiry, are any of those thing?

Infinite Monkeys said...

cacimbo said...
Sure looks like Trump has been the target of ongoing coup attempt since he took office.Is there a word for the opposite of "jury nullification" where the jury (Congress) vote guilty because they dislike Trump whether there is evidence of a crime or not.

10/2/19, 7:26 AM


Kangaroo court

Milo Minderbinder said...

The president is right to broaden the concept of impeachment because the House has ignored the process related to impeachment. The House calls it an impeachment inquiry, but without a vote it isn't.

buwaya said...

Bedtime for us when all you early risers are just getting started.
Anyway, same as many above. Not much point in comments really, I am a broken record.

This is not a narrow matter nor is it mere politics. Trump is right about the entire context of this business. It is a conflict created by your ruling class against its own people, as the interests of the former have generally diverged from those of the whole.

Which has been my basic point for years. You have a conflict that will not be resolved within your political/legal system, which no longer exists beyond a facade.

Trump isn't saying THAT, of course. In this he differs from other populists around the world, who are more prone to express frank disbelief in their institutions. I do wonder what he thinks though. On the surface he seems a believer in the 1950's frame of the American system, in spite of its total disappearance in fact. But this may be a pose.

Molly said...

(eaglebeak)

Just because impeachment is a tool offered in the Constitution doesn't mean it can't be used as a tool for a coup. In our present circumstance, that's what it is being used for. A tool to carry out a coup.

Any other interpretation is tantamount to saying that trials are provided for in the Constitution so how can an unfair trial be unfair, or a kangaroo court be marsupial?

Or:

In 1933, when the Reichstag passed the Enabling Act, which was permitted under the Weimar Constitution, it ushered in a BIG BIG coup in Germany, under coupmeister Adolf Hitler.

Rory said...

It's not unusual for political murders to be "legal," in that the paperwork was done and the designated process followed. Good faith is always a requirement.

Robert Edick said...

Our modern-day version of Samson (but with orange hair and Democrats instead of Philistines).

Dust Bunny Queen said...

Impeachment is part of the Constitution. How can using that provision be a coup?


It IS a Coup.

If the process of Impeachment is done incorrectly and is based on UN-Constitutional reasons (other than High Crimes and Misdemeanors) it is definitely part of the ongoing subterranean Coup that has been in process since BEFORE Trump was even inaugurated. Pelosi has bypassed Congress by proceeding with an impeachment "inquiry" without a vote. Unprecedented!

They, meaning the Deep State, have been doing everything possible to subvert the will of the voters by stymieing, blocking and preventing Trump from exercising the will of the people, in accomplishing what they voted him into office to do.

They, Deep State and Corrupt Judiciary, have also blocked Trump from using his CONSTITUTIONAL POWERS through endless judicial fiats.

Trump is absolutely right. This is an attempt to dispense with the Voters. To seize power and overthrow the Constitution.

Why do you think they want to take away the right of the people to be armed? Stifle the right of the people (anyone who disagrees with them) to speak out or be heard?

It IS a Coup. It WILL get ugly. BE prepared.

Andrew said...

It's been a coup from the beginning. What's shocking to me is the brazen chutzpah of the Democrats and their media allies. As if the Mueller report never happened. I'm hoping that there's a backlash among regular Americans, but there's no guarantee. Most people don't pay as close attention to the news as the commenters on this blog. Most people don't look up alternative news sources to learn more about the real stories. I'm hoping that the IG report and the Barr investigations will provide indisputable evidence that the Obama administration, the deep state, and the media were coordinating from the moment Trump was nominated, to prevent him from being elected, and then to overthrow his presidency. I'm genuinely amazed at Trump. His strength and perseverance against such an onslaught are near miraculous.

Ken B said...

Well impeachment is part of the constitution, but it is just wrong to claim it can only happen if the people support it.

Nonapod said...

Both Dictionary.com and Merriam-Webster seem to have seperate definitions for "coup" and "coup d'état". "Coup" is used to mean "a brilliant, sudden, and usually highly successful stroke or act".

Merriam-Webster says:
Definition of coup d'état
: a sudden decisive exercise of force in politics
especially : the violent overthrow or alteration of an existing government by a small group


But Dictionary.com says:
a sudden and decisive action in politics, especially one resulting in a change of government illegally or by force.

Dictionary uses the descriptor "illegally" but Merriam-Webster doesn't. So it might be subjective that a coup could be legal. As in, using the 25th amendment to remove a president could be considered a legal coup I guess.

Can Of Cheese for Hunter said...

Biden's son pulls in millions from illegal connections made by dad - and the media tell us that information is fake.

Just like the hack press excused the Clinton Family for living large off of a fake charity and all of the various methods she-> used to fill family coffers with international pay-to-play mega-donations.

Colbert is fine with Hillary's corruption because in his mind, it never happened.

Ken B said...

Unknown at 7:15 gives the perfect refutation of Althouse’s first claim.
It’s logic really. If it is possible for a president to abuse the constitution then likewise it is possible for congress as well. Good faith is the key ingredient, and it is overlooked by Althouse.

Another Hardin vindication thread.

Rory said...

One problem with the moderation delay is that multiple people can raise the same basic point and it looks like one is feeding off the other when in fact they've each raised the point independently.

Mike (MJB Wolf) said...

The Establishment of both parties has been effecting a coup ever since their first project, preventing Trump’s election, went sideways and the FBI had to invoke their “insurance policy” set in motion “in case the unthinkable [i.e. Trump wins] happens.” Obama’s people were bragging about embedding saboteurs and “whistleblowers” into the Executive Branch to assist La Resistance. Bragging about what has since very clearly come to pass.

Winston said...

"So, to put the idea “coup” into people’s head is just a way to fight against the impeachment movement."

This is a very naive, blinkered view. From early on the coup attempt to oust Trump has been obvious. Comey's manipulation to have a special counsel formed, the entrapment of Trump subordinates, the manipulation of the FISA process, the flood of leaks from the intel agencies, the Mueller team loaded with partisans, and now a "whistle blower" from the intelligence community. It takes no conspiracy theory to see what this is, a blatant, out in the open coup attempt largely initiated by the last administration and members of the permanent administrative state who have no qualms about overturning an election they deem illegitimate.

buwaya said...

As for "legal" coups, besides the case of Germany, it is quite common elsewhere. Even violent attack-the-palace cases have been under legal cover. Pinochets coup against Allende was preceded by the Chilean Supreme Court declaring Allende's government lawless, and the majority of the Chilean Chamber of Deputies calling on the military to restore the constitution.

Winston said...

"So, to put the idea “coup” into people’s head is just a way to fight against the impeachment movement."

This is a very naive, blinkered view. From early on the coup attempt to oust Trump has been obvious. Comey's manipulation to have a special counsel formed, the entrapment of Trump subordinates, the manipulation of the FISA process, the flood of leaks from the intel agencies, the Mueller team loaded with partisans, and now a "whistle blower" from the intelligence community. It takes no conspiracy theory to see what this is, a blatant, out in the open coup attempt largely initiated by the last administration and members of the permanent administrative state who have no qualms about overturning an election they deem illegitimate.

Michael K said...

the ICIG is aiding the Deep State trying to destroy the President who nominated him for the job.

I think this goes beyond Watergate which was a coup by Mark Felt and the WaPoo.

I even analyzed it back when Mark Felt told his identity.

In that instance, Nixon had participated in a coverup although not in the crime. Buchanan's book is indispensable in understanding what happened. He had suggested ways for Nixon to fight back but Nixon was too passive. Unlike Trump, he sought the approval of his enemies.

The next year will be a battle for the soul of the American people. I'm not ready to start burying guns yet but it is an interesting time.

Yesterday we had lunch with a woman who should be a Democrat. I don't normally bring up politics with casual acquaintances.

She is an artist, pretty good one, and a doctor's ex-wife. She is more passionate about supporting Trump than I am. We keep running into these people that Democrats don't seem to know. Hairdressers, plumbers, etc.

I'll wait and see.

ga6 said...

I am afraid someone here is a closet Menshevik, a potential "reluctant Commissar"

Martha said...

Mika and Joe led with a hectoring lecture that impeachment is no way like a coup since the Constitution says so.
Must be today’s Democrat talking points.

JAORE said...

Coup, coup kachoo.

rhhardin said...

Scott Adams today says the characterization as a coup is completely fair. Not all impeachments are coups but this one is.

Char Char Binks, Esq. said...

Well said, henry! I was trying to come up with just the right way to express that thought. Then I read your 7:13 comment, and you got it just right.

Lars Porsena said...


BleachBit-and-Hammers said...
The democrat party is corrupt. From top to bottom.
10/2/19, 8:31 AM

----------------------------------

That's not the problem.
It's the corruption of the CIA, FBI, and DOJ from top to bottom.

Jim Bob LA said...

The Deep State rebellion convinces me that it is time to scrap the whole Civil Service/tenure system. We already know about the adverse effects on productivity and efficiency of making it virtually impossible to fire a federal employee. I'm ready to go back to the spoils system. No more bureaucratic foot dragging resisting the President's agenda, and no more "burrowing in" when there's a party change at the top. And it's easier to hold an incumbent accountable when the excuse of obstruction by the bureaucrats is harder to sustain.

rcocean said...

Its a Coup - not an impeachment - when no "High Crimes and Misdemeanors" as commonly understood for 200 years are committed. The House isn't impeaching Trump, THE DEMOCRATS are impeaching Trump and by the smallest of margin. Further, the House D's haven't even heard the evidence, and they say they'll vote to impeach 235-0. That's a soft coup. The D Senators are already saying they'll vote to convict 45-0 and there hasn't even been a trial.

That's why its a coup.

rcocean said...

YOu can say this is all a waste of time, but then the D's in the House have made it clear they have NO DESIRE to pass any legislation or reform ANYTHING with the R's or compromise on ANYTHING.

So, they might as well amuse themselves playing impeachment. Or just go home.

Char Char Binks, Esq. said...

"I see Trump as more of a flashy-convertible or limo man."

The spelling alone gives credence to the idea that this tweet was fed to Trump.

narciso said...

Or the gov general replacing gough whitlam in 1975, because of the alan cairns loans among other things

Skeptical Voter said...


Mary MacNamara, a columnist who appears from time to time in the Los Angeles Times is already howling about Trump "hijacking" terminology. I suppose Trump's use of the word "coup" to describe the Dim's delirious efforts to impeach is one such example.

And of course if Kamala Harris succeeds in getting Trump kicked off Twitter, we won't have to worry about "hijacks" by Trump. Nope, not at all--we'll instead have to put up with "hijinks" from the Schiff-Nadler-Pelosi cabal.

narayanan said...

My Q: Can the i'm-peachy! challenge the Senate presiding judge and seek recusal?

I definitely have CJ of the SC John Roberts in mind - he is not an honest man.

Original Mike said...

"One problem with the moderation delay is that multiple people can raise the same basic point and it looks like one is feeding off the other when in fact they've each raised the point independently."

Yes, the time of the comment should not be when it was submitted, but rather when it was published.

NorthOfTheOneOhOne said...

MountainMan said...

Senator Lyman Trumbull of Illinois, who voted to acquit Andrew Johnson in 1868

Johnson was impeached largely over his efforts to remove Edwin M. Stanton as Secretary of War. Johnson also fought with the Radical Republicans over Reconstruction as he thought he had a sense of what Lincoln wanted, which did not jibe with their vengeance based policies.

Johnson's impeachment is a good parallel, though not perfect, for what's going on with Trump.

O2bnaz said...

AThe formation of our military is in the constitution. It can also be misused for a coup.

James L. Salmon said...

The current effort to impeach is just the next card in the "insurance" deck played by the corrupt deep state operatives who opposed Trump from the moment he came down the escalator. Initially, they expected to extract blackmail materials from their ongoing and ILLEGAL FISA abuse scheme. Surprisingly Trump - the real estate mogul who built in NYC, Atlantic City and Vegas - turned out to be cleaner than Mitt Romney's magic underwear. Team Coup, led by Clapper and Brennan planted "justifications" for a foreign intelligence investigation via Mifsud - the Maltese Fulcrum, hat tip to Sundance at the CTH - Downard and honeypots scattered throughout the UK, Ukraine and Russia. Armed with fruit of the poisonous FISA tree Team Coup then orchestrated the appointment of Mueller who sought to lure Trump into an obstruction of justice case. The ensuing Weissman Report an Mueller's catastrophic testimony proved futile. Ukraine, Ukraine Ukraine, follows Russia Russia Russia, Racist Racist Racist and will be no more effective. Trump ignored the obstruction trap and instead set out to fulfill his campaign promises. Horrified, Team Coup is now playing the only cards they have left and it will end poorly for them. The gig is up and Trump is poised to expose all the above. That's why Team Coup is playing the impeachment card. And yes, when a group of Coup plotters seek to impeach a sitting president the impeachment is a coup attempt.

tcrosse said...

There's no shortage of people who believe that Trump himself engineered a coup to usurp the Presidency from its rightful heir. Hillary H>erself has stated recently that Trump's presidency is illegitimate.

JohnAnnArbor said...

"Seven Days in May" was a fictional military coup. Has anyone imagined one by the bureaucracy, facilitated by opposition legislators?

Francisco D said...

"Impeachment in not even close to being a coup. First, impeachment doesn't remove the POTUS from office, it's an indictment that's passed over to the Senate.. ... That said, I think the House is overreaching on impeachment at this point, but it's their constitutional right to be foolish."

I tend to agree with your more cautious sentiment. However, the absolute frenzy unleashed by the media and Democrat leadership has instigated an equal and opposite reaction. Given their brazen attempts to sully Trump and drive him from office, one should expect anger and resentment from those who think Trump is doing a good job.

Laslo Spatula said...

It has become obvious that henceforth impeachment proceedings must begin upon the swearing in of all future Presidents.

Knowing that impeachments will routinely begin on that date gives the CIA and FBI proper time to prepare.

I am Laslo.

Mark said...

Nothing quite says freedom of speech like moderated commenting and selective deletion of Fen and other posters.

I would tag this FreedomOfSpeechBullshit if I could

Yancey Ward said...

"Sorry for not linking, but I’m having trouble linking to tweets this morning."

All tweets, or just this one?

Bay Area Guy said...

I was amazed when Mitch McConnell stood firm and (lawfully) held open the SCOTUS seat when Scalia died.

I was amazed when Trump stood tall to (lawfully) win Wis, Mich and Penn to win the Presidency.

I was amazed when Kavanaugh stood tall to get confirmed 50-48 in the face of sustained fraudulent character assassination.

I was amazed when Barr stood stall on Mueller's Report and (lawfully) declined to prosecute anyone due to lack of evidence.

I see the same problems, the same dangers, the same injustices both in the political world, and my own life, yet I remain a glass "half-full" type of guy. Too much amazement, success and optimism.

True, the House Dems want to impeach Trump and, theoretically, they have a majority to do so. They hate Trump much more than they love this country. They lie and distort the truth with ease.

Oh well. We will see how it turns out. Bring it on.

Let's Roll!

narciso said...

But of course:
https://thefederalist.com/2019/10/01/left-tries-to-wave-away-ig-changes-allowing-whistleblowers-to-weaponize-hearsay/

Yancey Ward said...

It is a coup, Althouse. Technically legal maneuvers have been used in coups from time immemorial, but they were still coups, and when they failed through legal means, then they usually proceed to illegal ones. I would say we have already seen the illegal means tried in the Mueller farce- those just failed, too, is all that happened. That they are sometimes popular coups is of no matter- republics often fall to thunderous applause.

Unknown said...

The legal system is part of the Constitution, so how can you define 'frivolous lawsuits' and prevent them from occurring?

purplepenquin said...

in your hour of dankness

Not sure about anyone else, but my hour of dankness usually starts at 20 minutes after 4.

Qwinn said...

Mark: I *liked* Fen, but he wholly earned his banning. His intentional spamming literally hundreds of duplicate posts is pretty much indistinguishable from a DOS attack. It's Ann's soapbox, and the quickest way I can think of to kill free speech is to provide equal access to everyone including those who have demonstrated a desire and intent to burn the soapboxes down.

narayanan said...

Laslo Spatula said...

It has become obvious that henceforth impeachment proceedings must begin upon the swearing in of all future Presidents.

Knowing that impeachments will routinely begin on that date gives the CIA and FBI proper time to prepare.
_______________________

May as well call DOJustice >> DOImpeachment and take it off Excecutive Branch

traditionalguy said...

Remember that Hillary and her staff are totally dedicated to political destruction of opponents by planted Media Scandals fed to their favorites "Journalists". Which sums up the Dossier cobbled together by Glen Simpson . He is a career opposition research specialist for hire that will make up anything that sounds believable , and for a few million more dollars will supply the witnesses swearing to have seen or heard it. The Ukraine-Russian BS costs a few more millions, but can be fed directly through the DOJ into the FBI to get FISA Warrants to cover for CIA illegal wire taps in place for years.

Just Mike S said...

@BAG
"...Let's Roll!"
Yep.

Bruce Hayden said...

Gaslighting the Voters:

Gaslighting” is a term well-known in the psychological counseling community, especially among those dealing with narcissistic personality disorders. It refers to the technique used by a narcissist to convince his victim that what he sees with his own eyes is not true, and hence, he must be going crazy. If the victim catches the narcissist in the act of some foul deed or betrayal, the narcissist will deny his guilt with such passion and apparent sincerity that the victim is tempted to believe him, despite the evidence of his own eyes. The technique is especially effective as a long-term strategy -- the victim or enabler is worn down by repeated assertions that what he just saw or knows to be true is actually false, to the point where he doesn’t have the strength to resist anymore.

It is apparent that this is the strategy the Democratic party hopes to ride to victory in 2020. The truth is the Russian Collusion Hoax, which the Democrats in Congress and the media obsessed over for two long years was not just a fabrication, but a deliberate coup attempt aimed at bringing down the legitimate head of the executive branch elected by the American people. The truth is the nominee of the Democratic party for president, Hillary Clinton, bought and paid for the fake opposition research that was used by the corrupt Obama administration as a pretext to spy on an opposing candidate. A climate of hysteria was created about these false charges in the hopes that public pressure could be built up to force the removal of Donald Trump from office. These truths are so outrageous, so unprecedented in American history, that it defies belief that no one has been punished for these actions to this date.

Instead the Democratic party, through their mouthpieces in the mainstream media, immediately shifted the subject to the next attempt to get Trump, one equally ludicrous and self-evidently false by anyone with a modicum of understanding. Just like with the Russian Collusion Delusion, it involves blaming Trump for something a Democrat has actually done, in this case Joe Biden. Biden is on tape bragging about how he interfered in the Ukraine legal system by insisting that the prosecutor investigating his son Hunter for corruption be fired. Yet the Democratic strategy is to convince the voters that they didn’t actually hear Joe say that, they only imagined they did.

tcrosse said...

It has become obvious that henceforth impeachment proceedings must begin upon the swearing in of all future Presidents.

At the coronation procession of a new Pope, he would be told three times, "Sic transit gloria mundi". They could do something similar at the inauguration of a new President.

Roughcoat said...

The inestimable David Warren plausibly speculates on how an American civil war might unfold: https://www.davidwarrenonline.com/

When the next American Civil War starts, I imagine it will look something like Hong Kong: a big melee spreading through all public spaces (I note that USA is bigger than Hong Kong). But there will be fairly limited casualties, at first, each of which will become the subject of unrestrained media outrage, until the media collapse under physical reprisals. Later, the better and better armed demonstrators, on both sides, will tactically “evolve.” The surveillance state itself will begin to disintegrate, and with it any hope of restoring public order, through agencies such as police, courts, and prisons. Things like border surveillance will be abandoned, with immediate consequences, but as the attraction of going to the States diminishes, no one will mind. More noticeably, the economy will break down....

Read the whole thing.

Bruce Hayden said...

Something else of interest that I noticed when reading the letter from the General Counsel to the DNI, and that was the comment, towards the end that the IC did not “own” the classified (Secret classification) information sent by the “whistleblower” to Congress, leaked to the press, and even included in their complaint. It is “owned” by the White House, which means that they control its distribution. Which means that most everything done by the ICIG and the “whistleblower” with the information, ostensibly violated the Espionage Act. This alone should be, at a minimum, sufficient legal grounds for firing both of them - though the IG being a Senate confirmed Principal Officer, serves at the pleasure of the President, and, thus, no cause is required. It still amazes me that the Senior Counsel for the DOJ NSD at a time when they were fabricating the Trump/Russian collusion hoax, submitting fraudulent FISA warrant applications, etc, was nominated and confirmed as ICIG.

mikesixes said...

Impeachment for "high crimes and misdemeanors" is a part of the constitution. Impeachment as a means of overturning an election is a coup.

Seeing Red said...

I never thought I’d see the day when the Dems morphed into the Palestinians, but here we are.

Golds Mier was right.

Seeing Red said...

All these “lawsuits” is how Sarah Palin stepped down from being Governor of Alaska.

Michael K said...

Given their brazen attempts to sully Trump and drive him from office, one should expect anger and resentment from those who think Trump is doing a good job.

A little too much "cruel neutrality," I would say.

Beasts of England said...

Sean Davis says Schiff coordinated with the whistleblower before the complaint was filed. If true, and I suspect it is, then it’s sedition by a member of Congress.

Marcus Bressler said...

I'm just repeating excellent points by many commenters, but:
As far as I am concerned, it's been an ongoing coup with different attacks, and this one, if there are NO high crimes and misd's, is part of that coup.

THEOLDMAN

Since I keep getting underlined "spelling errors" on commenters, I think I shall start referring to my distinguished colleagues here as "Persons of Comment"

320Busdriver said...

Fellow Sconnies, Are you tired of the BS thrust upon you by our nations ruling class?

Tired of hearing about all of their self dealing and corruption?( where to begin)

How about their penchant for spending waaay more money than they can reasonably extort from you.

I see that tomorrow in Madison WI there will be a Senate public hearing to consider The Convention Of States resolution at 1PM in room 411 South. Duey Stroebel is a co-sponsor and two more from the government oversight committee are needed.

Mark said...

Nothing quite says freedom of speech like moderated commenting and selective deletion of Fen and other posters.

Speaking of coups and freedom of speech, "Mark" -- there can be no freedom in speech when some create confusion about who really is saying what by engaging in a coup of the name of someone who has been here for years before you.

cubanbob said...

Every Democrat in the House will vote for impeachment. But I doubt they will get on Republican. Then it will go to the Senate where every Democrat will vote to remove including several of the candidates for president but no Republican will vote to remove. It will be seen for what it is, a naked partisan effort to overturn an election using fake evidence of crimes. Then trump will get re-elected and the Republicans will probably regain the House and then Trump and the Republican Congress will extract the requisite amount of pain on the Democrats. Then Democrats will howl about a coup.

tcrosse said...

It's ever so much tidier now that Althouse can curate her comments.

Michael K said...

The inestimable David Warren plausibly speculates

Another David Warren fan. Do you recall his comparison of Obama to Gorbachev ?

I saved it. Too long to post but the best part is this

Yet they do have one major thing in common, and that is the belief that, regardless of what the ruler does, the polity he rules must necessarily continue. This is perhaps the most essential, if seldom acknowledged, insight of the post-modern “liberal” mind: that if you take the pillars away, the roof will continue to hover in the air.

Gorbachev seemed to assume, right up to the fall of the Berlin Wall and then beyond it, that his Communist Party would recover from any temporary setbacks, and that the long-term effects of his glasnost and perestroika could only be to make it bigger and stronger.

There is a corollary of this largely unspoken assumption: that no matter what you do to one part of a machine, the rest of the machine will continue to function normally.


Could not be improved upon.

narciso said...

I remember when he called the huntress, person of the year, in 2008.

the thing about the nomenklatura, the structure is they became oligarchs if they were merely administrative, siloviki if they came from the security services,

Rory said...

"The truth is the nominee of the Democratic party for president, Hillary Clinton, bought and paid for the fake opposition research that was used by the corrupt Obama administration as a pretext to spy on an opposing candidate."

Periodic reminder that Clinton an the DNC, along with their press allies, promoted Trump as a viable candidate before Trump even formally announced, with the express goal of promoting mayhem in the Republican primaries.

I believe that the day will come when we find out that the Clintons spent years egging Trump on to make a run.

eddie willers said...

Every Democrat in the House will vote for impeachment.

There are 31 Democrats from districts that Trump carried, so I wouldn't be so sure. That's why Pelosi is trying to do it in a way that doesn't require a floor vote.

I'll now wait until later tonight to see how many people made the exact same point. (not a fan of moderating comments)

Bruce Hayden said...

“Every Democrat in the House will vote for impeachment. But I doubt they will get on Republican. Then it will go to the Senate where every Democrat will vote to remove including several of the candidates for president but no Republican will vote to remove”

I think that there may be up to maybe a dozen Dem defections in the House. Last time around Pelosi allowed just enough Blue Dog Democrats to defect that she could still get a Obamacare passed. I expect the same close nose counting, since that is probably the only way she gets both her precious impeachment passed and a chance for another term as Speaker. And in the Senate, I think that the Republicans might lose Romney on general principles, but possibly pick up Mnchin and Senema. Maybe some other Senators from Trump states, but likely not Tester from here in MT who has discovered that he can buy reelection by outspending his Republican opponent 3x or so on advertising (all outside money, of course), regardless of what he does in the Senate.

Original Mike said...

"Speaking of coups and freedom of speech, "Mark" -- there can be no freedom in speech when some create confusion about who really is saying what by engaging in a coup of the name of someone who has been here for years before you."

I bet the name 'Original Mark' is available.

Michael K said...

There are 31 Democrats from districts that Trump carried, so I wouldn't be so sure. That's why Pelosi is trying to do it in a way that doesn't require a floor vote.

I agree and I agree with Bruce, She is doing this this way to try to avoid exposing the Dems in Trump districts to exposure.

One reason why Trump is going into purple states like NM is to make the Democrats spend big. Plus, if Warren is the nominee, big outside money may dry up. Another reason i expect Hillary to get in.

Beasts of England said...

Bruce Hayden - I’m interested to see how Jones (D-AL) votes if it gets to the Senate. He’s up for re-election in 2020 - in a state Trump won by 25+ points.

narciso said...

this is what raskin's father founded:

https://www.heritage.org/node/23043/print-display

Michael K said...

Oh well. Moderation has the day off again.

Gk1 said...

I would hazard to guess that Pelosi made a deal with Nadler and Schitt last week that she would call for a phony "impeachment investigation" before recess and if the Ukraine smear took off she would start putting together articles of impeachment. If it flat lined (like its doing presently) and constituents in fly over areas vehemently oppose it, she will bail on impeachment and keep up the kabuki going until next year. I think Trump loused up their plans by releasing the transcripts and being transparent. You can tell the democrats were caught flat footed and their pre-prepared talking points were non operable. They expected to spend a few weeks conjecturing what was said, dumping more garbage in the media that they knew wasn't discussed on the phone call etc. I am beginning to join the crowd saying there won't be any impeachment proceedings, just ankle biting fraud and pretend hearings. Its tough when republicans fight back instead of being punching bags.

Michael K said...

Yup, out for a long walk. See you tomorrow

Rosalyn C. said...

In any endeavor there are those who minimize the contribution of the leader or management, as if anyone in that position would have produced the same results. That just is not true and there is no other Republican who has the strength of personality and vision to take on the issues as Trump has.

I looked at the press release from the oversight committee as well as the Cummings's memorandum and draft subpoena which lays out the extraordinary extent of the demands for documents surrounding the president's phone call.

What doesn't make any sense is the allegation that all or any of that material would in any way provide answers to the expressed purpose of the committees: "The Committees are investigating the extent to which President Trump jeopardized national security by pressing Ukraine to interfere with our 2020 election and by withholding security assistance provided by Congress to help Ukraine counter Russian aggression, as well as any efforts to cover up these matters."

How can they determine if our national security has been jeopardized? How can they assert definitively in advance that Ukraine has been pressed to interfere with our 2020 election? etc.

narciso said...

Its not about that.

Rosalyn C. said...

Link got dropped for The Committee on Oversight and Reform, Press release from Oct 2, 2019 justifying their investigation on national security grounds "Committees Ready Subpoena for White House After Ukraine Documents Withheld for Weeks"

Drago said...

Gk1: " I think Trump loused up their plans by releasing the transcripts and being transparent. You can tell the democrats were caught flat footed and their pre-prepared talking points were non operable. They expected to spend a few weeks conjecturing what was said, dumping more garbage in the media that they knew wasn't discussed on the phone call etc."

Yep.

lefty/dem smear merchants, like LLR Chuck, as always, hardest hit.

LOL

gadfly said...

Watching the Disinformation Being Made in Real Time: The New York Times reported some new information on how the whistleblower filed his complaint and Fox’s John Roberts teed it up as a conspiracy for the president to swing at during his press conference.

Drago said...

gadfly, our trusty "Poor Man's LLR Chuck", thinks he/she/xe is capable of waving his/her/xer hands and everyone will forget seeing LLR Chuck "fav" Li'l Adam Schiff-ty flatly state that he and his staff had no advance communications with the fake "whistleblower"....a now exposed blatant lie which is in violation of whistleblower rules!!

gadfly, I hope its become very clear to you why your blog failed.

But it probably hasnt...for obvious reasons.

LOL

Bruce Hayden said...

“I looked at the press release from the oversight committee as well as the Cummings's memorandum and draft subpoena which lays out the extraordinary extent of the demands for documents surrounding the president's phone call.”

They can subpoena or demand all that they want. The President has already said that he will assert Executive Privilege over pretty much everything that they are asking for or demanding. The telephone call involved foreign relations, and made fro the White House. That means that Congress, absent impeachment, has no business asking for it. Esp Cummings, whose mandate is oversight. Oversight does not extend to the White House.

Normally, based on the Nixon precedent, the House could get some documents etc, that would otherwise be protected by Executive Privilege during an impeachment inquiry. Except that in this case, there was not a formal vote of the House, and both the minority and the President have been stripped of their Due Process rights that they would normally have in an impeachment inquiry. Instead, their impeachment investigation was started at a meeting between Speaker Pelosi and her loyal henchmen and committee chairs. Moreover no prima facie case of a high crime or misdemeanor has been shown. Instead, their impeachment investigation is nakedly partisan, started with nothing more damning than OrangeManBad. Combine this with Trump having had over 150 federal judgeships filled, and a (current) 5-4 Supreme Court majority, and I fully expect the courts to refuse to side with the House here in this Separation of Powers dispute.

Making things worse for the House Dems, they really, really, don’t want to be engaged in a drawn out impeachment battle well into 2020, as the Presidential campaign gets underway. But fighting for every subpoena will likely result in just that. They really need for the impeachment investigation be completed, and a vote take to impeach this year and they have less than three months left, and much of that is traditionally filled with breaks and recesses.

Bruce Hayden said...

“gadfly, our trusty "Poor Man's LLR Chuck", thinks he/she/xe is capable of waving his/her/xer hands and everyone will forget seeing LLR Chuck "fav" Li'l Adam Schiff-ty flatly state that he and his staff had no advance communications with the fake "whistleblower"....a now exposed blatant lie which is in violation of whistleblower rules!!”

As I pointed out earlier, the transcripts in question were automatically classified (Secret), and they belong to the White House. That means that neither Congress, nor the IC have any legitimate reason to see the transcripts. The various members from the IC, including the ICIG and the (apparently) CIA analyst who filed the (revised 8/19) complaint, nor Pencil Neck Schiff, nor his staff, had legal access to the transcripts. Which means that everyone involved, except maybe Schiff himself, probably violated the Espionage Act.

rehajm said...

Plus, if Warren is the nominee, big outside money may dry up

From what I'm seeing much of the leftie big money is flowing to Warren but it could be due in part to MA bias and/or Harvard bias...

tim in vermont said...

Catching Schiff in a lie is just one more impeachable offence!

narciso said...

But the othet networks blithely continue:


https://dailycaller.com/2019/10/02/chris-cuomo-fred-fleitz-whistleblower-schiff/

Unknown said...

Yep, the President plays smash-mouth. And he plays it really well.

The alternative was Hillary, or worse, Please Clap. Do I wish we had this guy instead?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tlvK7XLNXNU

Yeah, but you dance with the one who brung ya'.

Ingachuck'stoothlessARM said...

Liddle douche coup
You don't know what I got!


This is not a legitimate process to purge corruption. It's an orchestrated, pre-meditated framing of a duly elected president based on false pretexts.

There's one more thing, I got the pink slip, daddy!

Michael K said...

The Althouses must be on a trip.

Maybe they set Blogger not to allow any comments,.

gilbar said...

Skylark said...
Catching Schiff in a lie is just one more impeachable offence!


HELL!
Just ATTEMPTING to catch Schiffty in a lie, is a DAMNINGLY Impeachable Offense

WHY would President Trump even be Trying to defend himself against Impeachment?
If the Evil, and Completely Guilty Trump Was "Innocent", he would show that "Innocence" by resigning
The Very ACT of defense: PROVES his guilt!

Hammond X. Gritzkofe said...

Two ideas to reduce the broadening factional battle for control of Government:
..reduce the powers of Government (to those explicitly granted in the Constitution);
..reduce the size of the electorate (to those with some "skin in the game").

Factional battles for control of Government are not new. Look up Clodius and Milo.

Sigivald said...

"It can only succeed if the people support using it"

Not ... technically true?

Congress can impeach and try without any popular support, though there may be some elections lost over it.

Do the Democrats (and enough Republican defectors) care about total popular support?

I mean, the Democrats' base already supports impeachment for any reason whatsoever, from what I see on Facebook.