"‘It’s a horrible thing they did’: Trump now bears the indelible mark of impeachment" — headline in The Washington Post on December 19, the day after the House took that vote.
"Impeachment indelible stain on Trump’s legacy" — headline in The Boston Herald.
"The indelible stain on Trump’s presidency belongs to the entire Republican Party" — headline in The Colorado Independent.
This idea of the indelible mark works to downplay the knowledge that the Senate will acquit the President. He won't be removed from office, so wasn't impeachment futile? No, it matters! It's an indelible mark that will last forever, a stain that can never be removed!
The assertion of indelibility seemed really important for... what?... a day? And then along came the new idea that the President wasn't even impeached at all. Yes, that too, happened on December 19th. Noah Feldman — last seen somberly informing us that what Donald Trump did was oh, so impeachable — returned for Act 2 of Law Professors Tell You What the Law Is.
It's December 23, and I haven't talked about this show yet. I've been actively avoiding it. I don't want to see "Cats" or "The Rise of Skywalker" either. I did feel like watching vintage TV commercials about laundry products that miraculously eradicated stains. (Remember the Clinton impeachment with its "stained" dress that was only stained because of a conscious choice not to wash it at all?) I found these 2 old Wisk ads — one from the 1970s and another from 1983. They're amusing to watch in sequence because of the radical social change from one decade to the next:
So, what's the answer to the question is Trump impeached? Sorry, I don't play in the show called Law Professors Tell You What the Law Is. But if you want to know what "impeachment" is, I'd say the answer has to do with what Americans believe it is. Whether Trump was impeached is a manipulable concept, and so is whether impeachment dirties the President, even temporarily. Maybe it's a mark of distinction to the one who is impeached and an embarrassment to the impeachers.
Professor Feldman says impeachment is "a process" and it's not complete until the House formally tells the Senate that it has voted to impeach. Is that about what impeachment means or about what impeachment does? The latter question is what turns on the Senate's "sole power to Try all impeachments"? Is the vote enough or must the House tell the Senate about the vote? Do you think the House should have the power to vote to impeach and then to withhold the case from the Senate? If that question needs to be answered, it's the Senate that will give the final answer. But the Senate can just as well decide not to decide, and leave this impeachment where the House has stowed it —in the back of the closet like an unwashed dress...
... she said she initially thought the marks on her dress "could be spinach dip or something."... she didn’t notice the stain until she took the dress out for Thanksgiving. She tried it on for confidante Linda Tripp, who told her it made her look fat. When the two women figured out that the president’s semen was deposited on the blue Gap dress, Tripp — who was taping Lewinsky — encouraged her to keep it....Just keep it around. You might want to use it. But for now, you know, it makes you look fat.
Posts
257 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 257 of 257Seriously. The Dems view impeachment as a Get Out Of Jail Free card for the next 5 years. Any indictments from now on are now just revenge based on venal motives! God knows they don't need evidence of venal motives, just the assertion that a venal motive is theoretically possible has been good enough for the useful idiots so far.
Pretty nice that they can vote themselves that GOOJF card on a party line vote, isn't it?
It's so freaking obvious I'm amazed how few people have noticed. If they didn't have "Retaliation for Impeachment!", they'd have to argue their innocence in open court. And even having 95% of lawyers in their guild isn't going to get then through THAT.
Earnest Prole said...
As I’ve noted before, among other things Trump’s impeachment is a tit-for-tat, game-theory auto-response to Clinton’s impeachment.
Tit for Tat would have been to impeach Bush in 2007 for "lying about WMD in Iraq"
Bill Clinton committed actual crimes, and was properly impeached
Trump's "crime" was winning the 2016 Presidential election.
This is Democrats being sore losers with no respect for anything that gets in the way of their lust for power. Nothing more
Tell ya what. Any lefties here willing to agree up front that Democrats are not "above the law", and they are not immune to investigations and indictments for the next 5 years, and if Barr or Durhan hand down indictments, you won't dismiss them out of hand based on an assumption of venal motives? That you won't instinctively scream "Retaliation!" before the ink on the indictments is even dry?
Heh. Didn't think so.
Poor ARM.
What is one to do when every previous lefty/LLR-lefty lie has fallen flat?
Simply roll with a new one! The NEWEST SMOKING GUN THAT PROVES THE DEMS HAVE BEEN RIGHT ALL ALONG......until you actually look at it and its just like all the rest of ARM's lies.
ARM gets dismantled about once every other day now when someone takes the time to perform even the most cursory look at what ARM's latest claims are.
On the other hand, perhaps there is something to be said for consistency.
I have to admit that attempting to deny the existence of 3+ years of straight up lying about collusion and treasonous traitors etc after the real facts begin trickling out is quite an aggressive move on ARM's part.
But hey ARM, we should totally let bygones be bygones and take these newest fake charges with the utmost of seriousness!
LOL
Yeah, I don't think that one is gonna play very well in Peoria.
Still waiting for those links …
But really, its not the previous 3+ years worth of lies told by ARM and his army of lefty pals. It's not even this latest moronic lie which was clearly the dems last resort.
What I'm most interested in is what the NEXT big lie will be.
Any clues on that one yet ARM? Do let us know when you get an early heads up. I'm sure the next one is definitely going to be the one that gets those darn walls to finally "close in!!".
Of course, we have today's ARM contribution in the form of a supposed smoking gun which we can examine to see just what ARM's schtick has been (not that I blame him, why should LLR-lefty Chuck have all the lefty BS fun?)
in the second sentence of the Duffey email, Duffey explicitly says the hold is temporary and will not interfere with the execution of the final policy direction.
Yes, that is ARM's newest smoking gun!! Awesome job ARM!
It almost makes one nostalgic for the hoax dossier, which ARM loved loved loved to reference, especially the hoax golden showers part.
Seriously, how stupid does one have to be to continually buy into these transparent hoaxes?
C'mon lefties! "No one is above the law!" Put up or shut up. Tell us now - what indictment could possibly come down against a Democrat in the next five years that could possibly have legitimacy in your eyes?
Because you've already stipulated that just an investigation of Hunter Biden is illegitimate to the point of impeachable. And you base that on Biden running for President. But that will only hold water until the election. So you needed something that will outlast the election. "Retaliation For Impeachment" it is!
Am I wrong? Then tell us what legitimate grounds there can be in your eyes for any indictment of a Democrat in the next five years. What's the threshold?
Cause if the obviousness of Biden corruption doesn't meet that threshold, NOTHING ever could.
And that's what Democrats need to be "indelible". Nothing else matters.
My recent link was to a right wing publication, the Daily Mail. Even many on the right think Trump is a shit show, only useful for selling papers.
ARM: "My recent link was to a right wing publication, the Daily Mail. Even many on the right think Trump is a shit show, only useful for selling papers."
LOLOLOLOLOL
Uh, pal, the Daily Mail is not right wing and is clearly anti-Trump. The Telegraph is clearly the right wing (such as it is) option in Britain.
Nice try though dummy. Were you thinking we were still in the 80's? Try and keep up will you?
You strike me as much more of a Der Spiegel guy anyway since they really hate the US and are happy to push any lunatic lies about us that they can.
Still waiting for those links …
Go ahead ARM. Why don't you give us the second line in that email. In its entirety.
Go ahead, we'll wait.
.....................(insert jeopardy music here)...............
Something tells me we won't be hearing much more from ARM about this latest lefty lie, will we?
The truth could be found in the second line of the email, but ARM didn't bother. He had his headline and he ran with it!!
LOL
Inga would be very very proud of that manuever.
In the future ARM, when I inevitably return to this subject as an illustration of your stupidity and gullibility (which the dems no doubt count upon), lets not have any more of your faux outraged outrage that such a charge could ever be leveled at you!
Capisce?
Still waiting for those links …
Your 'returning' to this or any other commenters past comments is just your insane fantasy version - not reality. You make a mockery of discourse on this web site. Completely unserious.
No ARM it's you people who are serious that make a mockery of this blog.
"The Mail has a distinct news bias - highlighting differences between people and increasing fear of foreigners, targeting the poor and needy, gay and transgender etc : recently had a whole campaign to reduce foreign aid, plus whipping up fear of the EU with bogus stories, highlighting NHS and teacher failings, to support Tory dismantling of the state, - basically rubbishing any act of kindness, as "political correctness". It is the most pernicious and blatant propaganda outlet the UK has. "
And even they think Trump is a shit show.
ARM: "Your 'returning' to this or any other commenters past comments is just your insane fantasy version - not reality."
Hmmm, not reality.
Okay, lets recap.
ARM posts link to a supposedly smoking gun email which will show (this time for sure!!) that Trump did something nefarious.
I simply point out the insanity of such a claim and then provide details of the second line of that very email which conclusively demonstrates the exact OPPOSITE of what ARM and his pals were claiming.
ARM then defines this as "not reality".
Discuss.
Okay okay ARM. That Daily Mail is really "right wing"....(wink wink)
BTW ARM, I wonder where you got that description of the Daily Mail. Hmmmm, the usual suspects I suppose, eh? Nice move on your part to make sure not to include that! (did you think we would not notice?)
LOL
Next up: creeping fascism at the Guardian!!
Still waiting to hear what the current acceptable threshold for applying the law to any Democrat for the next five years is. Tell us how much evidence against a Dem9crat is required in order to concede that Trump's DOJ is allowed to investigate or prosecute it.
Don't you all think it's important to hammer that out now, ahead of time?
I can't imagine why you wouldn't want to, unless you already know that the entire point of the "indelible impeachment" is to make the answer "No amount of evidence could possibly be sufficient."
Tit for Tat would have been to impeach Bush in 2007 for "lying about WMD in Iraq"
Iraq WMDs were promulgated by the Democrats’ now-best-friends the CIA, who managed to persuade not only George Bush but Hillary Clinton among other prominent Democrats — in other words, an insufficient basis for tit-for-tat.
Drago, which part of "White House officials requested that aid to Ukraine be held around 1 1/2 hours after President Donald Trump's July phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy, according to newly obtained documents" do you believe is helpful to Trump and that I was wrong in bringing to the attention of the local minds?
ARM doubles down!!
LOL
You knew he couldn't resist.
Any port in a storm I guess.
You've got him now ARM!! Run with it. Run like the wind! The Walls are closing in!!
You know, in my wildest dreams I would never have thought the dems/left/LLR-left would be so addled and moronic that they would go into permanent impeachment and rake-in-face hoax mode again and again and again.
'
But here we are.
Is Trump a genius, or just a genius at getting the decidedly non-genius lefties/dems/LLR-lefties to expose just how "un-genius-y" they are?
Maybe its both?
Unbelievably, The day after the Sham-peachment:
Nancy Pelosi (on why she isn't sending the articles over to the Senate): “Just to get this off the table right away, if we impeach the president immediately, everybody moves on to the next thing.”
LOLOLOLOL
Now doesn't that just tell us everything we need to know?
To Nancy's credit, her dentures weren't falling out at the moment she said that, which is a big plus usually. However, that wasn't the case for the rest of the "press conference".
One hesitates to call those events "press conferences" when dems are involved. That's because those are more like team meetings with the dems as the coaches providing direction to the minions.
But surely you have an opinion on this Drago. Which aspect of "White House officials requested that aid to Ukraine be held around 1 1/2 hours after President Donald Trump's July phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy, according to newly obtained documents" do you feel is helpful in exonerating Trump from the impeachment charges that he faces? The trivial interpretation is that it is very unhelpful, but I am sure that there is a more sophisticated understanding of this particular set of documents that explains how Trump was actually trying to help the plucky Ukrainians with his actions.
ARM: "The trivial interpretation is that it is very unhelpful, but I am sure that there is a more sophisticated understanding of this particular set of documents that explains how Trump was actually trying to help the plucky Ukrainians with his actions."
LOLOLOL
I read the second sentence of the email.
It's helpful to do things like that.
But please, do go on with this. Speed it up in fact!! Keep it going forever!!
I don't know how much Brad Parscale is paying you and LLR-lefty Chuck and Inga, but whatever it is it ain't enough!
BTW, I never got to inquire as to how ARM was handling the very bad news (from an anti-American perspective) that China was dropping tariffs on over 800 items that can now be exported from the US to China?
And that's on top of the Phase 1 Trade deal completion and acceleration of the Phase 2 negotiations.
I mean, that's gotta be killing ARM and LLR-lefty Chuck as they spent years claiming all these deals would be impossible to close.
Yet here we are.
Thoughts and prayers to ARM and LLR-lefty Chuck in these difficult times.
Favorite tweet seen this weekend: The United States now has two Presidents impeached for embarrassing Hilary Clinton.
Good news lefties/LLR-lefties.
Dems are trying to reestablish the russia collusion narrative now that their ukrainian hoax shampeachment isn't fooling anyone.
Outstanding!
Drago said...
I read the second sentence of the email.
The First sentence says:
Based on guidance I have received and in light of the Administration's plan to review assistance to Ukraine, including the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative, please hold off on any additional DoD obligations of these funds, pending direction from that process.
The second sentence is as follows:
"I understand that DOD will continue its planning and casework during this period and that this brief pause in obligations will not precluded DOD's timely execution of the final policy direction"
The first sentence is unambiguous - STOP SENDING MONEY. The second sentence is admin speak that says nothing. There is no definition of 'brief' or 'timely'.
How do you believe that this helps Trump's case?
ARM: "How do you believe that this helps Trump's case?"
LOL
Run with this one.
It's gotta work!!
Merry Impeachmas!
Lovely day here in the Willamette Valley, dry and sunny. Another two hours of daylight. I'll probably be the person on this thread.
In all this history of impeachment stuff, I've only heard once that Andrew Johnson was a War Democrat and Lincoln and Johnson ran on the National Union ticket. And that the main charge, violation of the Tenure in Office Act, was after acquittal mooted by the Supreme Court ruling the law unconstitutional. Shades of firing FBI directors.
Of course, Johnson was a white supremacist and stood in the way of completing the Second Revolution, the Jubilee. Thank god for Grant.
Back to work.
I wonder how many times Trump will be impeached during his second term.
Wait, is the links that ARM is requesting from Drago supposed to prove that ARM himself advanced Drago's list of disproven conspiracy theories?
If so, would a link to ARM from a couple of nights ago where he freaks out over the Trump Foundation having to shell out two... MILLION... dollars... because a NY lawfare group argued that once Trump put his OWN money into his own charity, he couldn't use it for anything else... but still, HIS OWN MONEY... that this revealed that Trump was an immoral scumbag and criminal who doesn't care about veterans and kids with cancer because he *only* donated 3.5 million of his own money to them, above and beyond ARM's two... MILLION... dollar settlement...?
All the while utterly dismissing the 4.5 BILLION that the Clinton's actually stole - not their own money... from Haitian earthquake victims?
The one where it's pointed out that 2 million of Trump's own money is 0.003% of the 4.5 billion that the Clintons stole from Haiti?
Would that conspiracy theory from ARM settle the issue?
Nice Metoo# post Quinn... I'm sure Drago's waning self-esteem appreciates it
Howard: "Nice Metoo# post Quinn... I'm sure Drago's waning self-esteem appreciates it"
Note to self: Howard does not like it when his lefty pals are exposed.
besides john Solomon and less smith, Michael tracey aaron mates and this fellow, have given some of the best readings on the issue, the link is to Stephen McIntyre,
https://twitter.com/JSCookJr/status/1209187578341134336
I didn't post it to help Drago.
I posted it so that stupid "Waiting for links" back and forth could end and at least one leftist on the board will answer the question:
How much evidence and how bad will the crime have to be over the next 5 years for a Democrat to be legitimately indictable or prosecutable by Trump's DOJ?
I don't think I'm asking for a lot here. Any commitment short of "no amount of evidence could possibly suffice to make subjecting Democrats to the law legitimate" will do.
But I think we all know that *is* too much to ask.
the professor has further thoughts,
https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-12-22/trump-impeachment-why-can-t-the-senate-start-a-trial-now
'he raised questions over the crowdstrike assessment, initially,
https://twitter.com/aaronjmate/status/1208747701267030016
ARM doing his 'he/it is a Republican' schtick again?
Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...
White House froze $391million in Ukraine aide just 91 MINUTES after Trump asked Zelensky to investigate the Bidens, even though budget staff feared it was illegal, shocking new emails suggest
You shock easy, don't you. Assuming everything above is as you would have us believe, sounds like the uses of power. Or is it too late to impeach Al Gore and any who sided with him, for far worse?
Feom the wiki on extraordinary rendition:
The American Civil Liberties Union alleges that extraordinary rendition was developed during the Clinton administration. CIA officials in the mid-1990s were trying to track down and dismantle militant Islamic organizations in the Middle East, particularly Al Qaeda.[20]
According to Clinton administration official Richard Clarke:
'extraordinary renditions', were operations to apprehend terrorists abroad, usually without the knowledge of and almost always without public acknowledgment of the host government ... The first time I proposed a snatch, in 1993, the White House Counsel, Lloyd Cutler, demanded a meeting with the President to explain how it violated international law. Clinton had seemed to be siding with Cutler until Al Gore belatedly joined the meeting, having just flown overnight from South Africa. Clinton recapped the arguments on both sides for Gore: 'Lloyd says this. Dick says that.' Gore laughed and said, 'That's a no-brainer. Of course it's a violation of international law, that's why it's a covert action. The guy is a terrorist. Go grab his ass.'[36]
It looks like you have picked yourself up a cute little wingman there Drago. New guys are so eager to please
Not sure Qwinn is really an asset.
Withholding the articles, Tribe said, would strengthen Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer’s hand as he negotiates with Majority Leader Mitch McConnell on the terms of the trial. It would do so, Tribe speculated, “because of McConnell’s and Trump’s urgent desire to get this whole business behind them.”
Without concessions from McConnell, Tribe urged Democrats to withhold the articles indefinitely, because a trial dominated by majority Republicans “would fail to render a meaningful verdict of acquittal.”
It seemed a far-fetched idea, to be generous. McConnell and Senate Republicans would be perfectly happy if they never had to hold a trial; after all, they didn’t impeach Trump. “I admit I’m not sure what leverage there is in refraining from sending us something we do not want,” McConnell said drily.
After the weekly Senate Republican lunch, I asked one GOP lawmaker, via text, what the party’s reaction was. He texted back a one-word answer: “Laughter.”
https://elkodaily.com/opinion/columnists/byron-york-as-pelosi-plays-games-with-impeachment-what-next/article_728658f5-591b-5bc1-9b6d-88641aee68ff.html
Pelosi is playing keepaway with a sloppily constructed shit sandwich which she may have to eat to feign dominance. "I took action!"
So no leftie here is willing to answer the question. As expected. They already know I'm right that their script has already been written for them, and that as far as they're concerned, all Democrats are, have been, will be, MUST be and always remain Above The Law.
Treasonous scumbags, all.
You're being generous, ARM
Imagine just how much you two could show me up by answering my very simple question.
Wellll, Howie and ARM are becoming "butt buddies" then.
;), right?
Yes Qwinn,
Best you can hope for are deflections and snark darts.
I just love how Schitt and Nadler framed things up via secret hearings, supposed rock solid evidence and Democracy vulnerable timeframe urgency claims only to have Pelosi/(Schumer) hold back on moving forward to search for more compelling testimony and fair treatment!
But hey..delay away. They'll lose their own supporters and place their incompetence in closer proximity to Barr/Durham findings and Dem convention.
Has any ONE of the outlets or people saying this indelibly marks Trump, said or written anything derogatory about Bill Clinton's impeachment in the last 15 years?
Waiting...
Still waiting...
I guess not.
Penguin/Nadler certainly decried procedural issues he is A-OK with now
Earnest Prole said...
As I’ve noted before, among other things Trump’s impeachment is a tit-for-tat, game-theory auto-response to Clinton’s impeachment.
12/23/19, 12:21 PM
You could say with more justification that Clinton's was Tit for Tat for Nixon's.
You could say with more justification that Clinton's was Tit for Tat for Nixon's.
Distinctions not cost-effective.
Post a Comment