39 votes

FBI believed Trump was closely involved in hush-money scheme, unsealed documents show

25 comments

  1. [23]
    GnomeChompski
    Link
    Evidence seems to constantly build up but nothing seems to stick. I wonder if we will ever get to a tipping point with Trump and finally make him pay the price? For those that don't know,...

    Evidence seems to constantly build up but nothing seems to stick. I wonder if we will ever get to a tipping point with Trump and finally make him pay the price? For those that don't know, impeachment efforts failed yesterday. But the truth is that impeachment on the grounds of racism is far weaker a reason that Obstruction of Justice.

    18 votes
    1. The_Fad
      Link Parent
      Which is just...okay, I'm not saying it should be the other way around or anything, because obstruction of justice is a serious crime. It just seems like racism should maybe be slightly MORE...

      But the truth is that impeachment on the grounds of racism is far weaker a reason that Obstruction of Justice

      Which is just...okay, I'm not saying it should be the other way around or anything, because obstruction of justice is a serious crime. It just seems like racism should maybe be slightly MORE noteworthy than it seems to be, legally?

      15 votes
    2. [14]
      Comment deleted by author
      Link Parent
      1. [7]
        GnomeChompski
        Link Parent
        What a truly scary thought of Trump being a metaphorical Caesar crossing the Rubicon, doing away with the Constitution and us becoming the American Empire. I really find it so hard to believe...

        What a truly scary thought of Trump being a metaphorical Caesar crossing the Rubicon, doing away with the Constitution and us becoming the American Empire.

        I really find it so hard to believe that's possible, but I would have never in a million years thought Trump would have ended up winning in 2016.

        12 votes
        1. [7]
          Comment deleted by author
          Link Parent
          1. [6]
            GnomeChompski
            Link Parent
            So you're saying that our checks and balances have systemically failed?

            So you're saying that our checks and balances have systemically failed?

            15 votes
            1. [6]
              Comment deleted by author
              Link Parent
              1. [5]
                teaearlgraycold
                Link Parent
                With knowledge of how the American system is failing, how would we design a government more resistant to this downfall?

                With knowledge of how the American system is failing, how would we design a government more resistant to this downfall?

                6 votes
                1. [4]
                  Comment deleted by author
                  Link Parent
                  1. [2]
                    imperialismus
                    Link Parent
                    Getting rid of the first-past-the-post system would be a start, even if you don't do ranked voting.

                    Some form of Ranked/Preferential Choice voting. Our current system makes more than two parties non-viable, and dis-empowers more people than it empowers. Get something better going on, and we might actually see parties that represent the people in a substantial way.

                    Getting rid of the first-past-the-post system would be a start, even if you don't do ranked voting.

                    8 votes
                    1. teaearlgraycold
                      Link Parent
                      I'm told range voting is better than ranked. There's still a small spoiler effect with ranked voting since there's only one top spot. With ranked voting you could give two people 5/5.

                      I'm told range voting is better than ranked. There's still a small spoiler effect with ranked voting since there's only one top spot. With ranked voting you could give two people 5/5.

                      4 votes
                  2. spctrvl
                    Link Parent
                    I think the senate needs a complete overhaul to being a party-list proportional body, elected at large, instead of 2 senators per state. There are too many states that have basically nobody living...

                    The Senate, I'm really not sure. Term limits would help. Put them on the House too. Both chambers are already always campaigning and accepting money anyway. At least with limits you can force out dinosaurs with antiquated ideals and minimize systematic corruption. More young people in government. The future belongs to the young, they ought to have a word in edgewise on how things are done.

                    I think the senate needs a complete overhaul to being a party-list proportional body, elected at large, instead of 2 senators per state. There are too many states that have basically nobody living in them, a majority in the senate can be obtained with the support of less than 9% of the population, and for such an important body, that's just completely untenable. It's also not really what the framers had in mind, as when the constitution was written, the thirteen states had much closer population sizes. Significantly, the 24 least populous states today all have smaller shares of the population than did the least populous single state in 1790.

                    There's some other bonuses to a party list proportional senate as well, like having a house of congress dedicated to the representing the whole country, counterbalancing the local representation in the house, and providing an in for third parties. But I'm not extremely picky with what replaces it, I just think the two-per-state election method has to go, and sooner rather than later. It's obviously hideously unrepresentative, and is ripe for exploitation in a United States with an increasingly concentrated population.

                    7 votes
                2. Mookie007
                  Link Parent
                  I don't think there's any government that can withstand attacks from within if the public isn't shutting things down until it's dealt with. And moreso if a significant portion of the public...

                  I don't think there's any government that can withstand attacks from within if the public isn't shutting things down until it's dealt with. And moreso if a significant portion of the public supports it.

                  When Acosta was in limbo, I remember hearing Mulvanay say something like, he's been doing a great job with our agenda of deregulation, and for whatever reason, that gave me shivers (cause like osha says, regulations are written in blood) They are destroying govt and Trump works as an amazing distraction from that their doing behind the curtain. Sorry, new hear and I didn't mean to rant.

                  3 votes
      2. [6]
        Rocket_Man
        Link Parent
        You can't illegally stay in office without significant military support. Trump doesn't have that level of support and he never will.

        You can't illegally stay in office without significant military support. Trump doesn't have that level of support and he never will.

        1. [6]
          Comment deleted by author
          Link Parent
          1. [5]
            Rocket_Man
            Link Parent
            I just think it's ridiculous to think that a peaceful transition of power wont happen. That ideal is held in high regard by both democrats and republicans. Honestly, I feel like talk like this...

            I just think it's ridiculous to think that a peaceful transition of power wont happen. That ideal is held in high regard by both democrats and republicans. Honestly, I feel like talk like this just makes Tildes look bad, Like it's full of crazy leftists.

            6 votes
            1. [4]
              Comment deleted by author
              Link Parent
              1. [3]
                Rocket_Man
                Link Parent
                I suppose we'll see what happens.

                I suppose we'll see what happens.

                1. [3]
                  Comment deleted by author
                  Link Parent
                  1. [2]
                    cfabbro
                    Link Parent
                    The words "National Emergency" and "Emergency Powers" come to mind here... and all it might take for those to be enacted is an excuse, like a conveniently well-timed "terrorist attack" on the...

                    The words "National Emergency" and "Emergency Powers" come to mind here... and all it might take for those to be enacted is an excuse, like a conveniently well-timed "terrorist attack" on the country right before his second term is up. Or if Trump loses the next Federal election, if the Republicans can continue to drum up enough belief in the nonsensical idea of illegal immigrants having voted undermining the results, that might be enough to pull something off, too.

                    /tin-foil hat time

                    2 votes
                    1. Ellimist
                      Link Parent
                      Not gonna lie....you mentioning "Emergency Powers" gives me nightmares of Emperor Trump, secretly Dark Lord of the Sith which....honestly....would explain a helluva lot about his presidency.

                      Not gonna lie....you mentioning "Emergency Powers" gives me nightmares of Emperor Trump, secretly Dark Lord of the Sith which....honestly....would explain a helluva lot about his presidency.

                      1 vote
            2. alyaza
              Link Parent
              on paper. but donald is not an on paper president, because on paper, most of the shit he's done should have tanked him, but it didn't. he campaigned on no interventions, then he lobbed some...

              That ideal is held in high regard by both democrats and republicans.

              on paper. but donald is not an on paper president, because on paper, most of the shit he's done should have tanked him, but it didn't. he campaigned on no interventions, then he lobbed some airstrikes into syria, and from 30% republican approval under obama managed to win the approval of 85% of republicans in doing so.

              his base--and the congressment under him, for that matter--has consistently catered and bent itself to his every whim, even when it is categorically contradictory to what you would think they'd stand for, and i don't buy for a second the idea that they'd suddenly stop if he says he won't step down. they didn't when he started pushing that rhetoric when it seemed he was likely to lose in 2016, and there's no reason to think they would if he did in 2020. now, is it likely? of course not. but donald trump becoming president wasn't exactly a likely outcome either, and he's far too enigmatic to completely rule out any possibility.

              4 votes
    3. [8]
      Mookie007
      Link Parent
      So yes, the impeachment vote yesterday was for the racism, but are they limited to only following the resolution that passes? Would they be able to put forth an additional resolution after...

      So yes, the impeachment vote yesterday was for the racism, but are they limited to only following the resolution that passes? Would they be able to put forth an additional resolution after Mueller's testimony next week and run hearings concurrently for both resolutions? Or can there be only one? It sucks that he's using yesterday's vote as a win.

      2 votes
      1. [7]
        nacho
        Link Parent
        It's almost exactly like Nancy Pelosi warned against this and said that talking about impeachment, starting impeachment or bothering with anything related to impeachment at this time, without an...

        It sucks that he's using yesterday's vote as a win.

        It's almost exactly like Nancy Pelosi warned against this and said that talking about impeachment, starting impeachment or bothering with anything related to impeachment at this time, without an incredible smoking gun that can get a conviction in the Senate, is an absolute waste of time. Worse, it plays right into Trump's hand.

        The more focus on impeachment, the easier Trump's election platform, unless he were actually to be impeached. Everyone I've talked to about impeachment over the last year and more doesn't even have an idea on what 20 (!) Republican senators would have to vote with the Democrats and independents for the 2/3 majority required for impeachment. Much less what it'd take for those 20 to vote for removing Trump.

        4 votes
        1. [5]
          moonbathers
          Link Parent
          Trump could murder someone on live television and the Senate wouldn't remove him. I used to think we shouldn't impeach him until it's ironclad either, but it's never going to be ironclad. If we...

          Trump could murder someone on live television and the Senate wouldn't remove him. I used to think we shouldn't impeach him until it's ironclad either, but it's never going to be ironclad. If we don't at least try then that shows future presidents they can get away with it too.

          6 votes
          1. [4]
            papasquat
            Link Parent
            The issue is that he can get away with it. Impeachment means absolutely nothing without the Senate's sign off. At best, it's a ceremonial overture that doesn't do anything. At worst, it's a boon...

            The issue is that he can get away with it. Impeachment means absolutely nothing without the Senate's sign off. At best, it's a ceremonial overture that doesn't do anything. At worst, it's a boon to Trump in 2020, who can just say "The power hungry dems tried to impeach me because they're jealous and it FAILED, because of how great I am!" Republicans made the exact same mistake with Clinton, and all it did is boost Clinton's approval ratings.

            Like it or not, politics are inherently... well... political. It doesn't matter how bad you think someone is, if you don't have the power to actually influence the situation in a meaningful way, then dramatically moving against them doesn't help anything, it just actively hurts you instead. The only way Trump gets impeached is if democrats control the senate, or he does something that republicans really don't like. As it stands, racism doesn't really rate that high on the list of republican sins.

            5 votes
            1. [3]
              moonbathers
              Link Parent
              I get that it's a purely political move, but I think not even trying to hold him accountable is worse than impeaching and him not being removed. It would tell any future Republican presidents (who...

              I get that it's a purely political move, but I think not even trying to hold him accountable is worse than impeaching and him not being removed. It would tell any future Republican presidents (who will probably be more competent than Trump) that they can do whatever they want.

              Impeaching Trump would be infinitely more valid than impeaching Bill Clinton was and it'd be easy to show that in impeachment hearings. At the very least if he got hauled in for a hearing he'd lie under oath way more often and way more blatantly than Clinton did, and even aside from the numerous crimes he's committed it would plainly show that he's a liar.

              Yes, he wouldn't get removed for anything short of nuking one of our own major cities and he'd spin it as an unfair attack, but it would air out more of his dirty laundry. I don't think it'd be a clear win for him.

              3 votes
              1. [2]
                papasquat
                Link Parent
                We already know he's a liar though. Democrats would talk about what a liar he is, Republicans would talk about how this is a ridiculous witchhunt. It doesn't accomplish anything, except give him...

                At the very least if he got hauled in for a hearing he'd lie under oath way more often and way more blatantly than Clinton did, and even aside from the numerous crimes he's committed it would plainly show that he's a liar.

                We already know he's a liar though. Democrats would talk about what a liar he is, Republicans would talk about how this is a ridiculous witchhunt. It doesn't accomplish anything, except give him ammo to claim he's been completely exonerated when the senate quickly clears him. You're right, it would be a purely political move by the democrats, but that's not why they shouldn't do it. They shouldn't do it because it will hurt their chances at the presidency and controlling the legislature in the next election.

                I wish democrats would just focus on winning in 2020, then try him in criminal court afterwards.

                1 vote
                1. moonbathers
                  Link Parent
                  We're just gonna have to agree to disagree I think, because I don't think it will hurt Democrats' 2020 hopes that badly.

                  We're just gonna have to agree to disagree I think, because I don't think it will hurt Democrats' 2020 hopes that badly.

        2. papasquat
          Link Parent
          I'm encouraged, but also slightly annoyed at the idealistic younger generation of liberal politically engaged people. Encouraged, because it seems like the left in general is finally starting to...

          I'm encouraged, but also slightly annoyed at the idealistic younger generation of liberal politically engaged people. Encouraged, because it seems like the left in general is finally starting to get invigorated about something other than Trump being bad, or Obama being black. Annoyed, because realpolitik is a concept that seems completely devoid in much of the movement. They want to impeach trump because they want him out of office, but that's not how it works. You can't just wish for something really extra super hard and expect it to happen. You have to operate in the real world, and make decisions based on the best outcomes that you can realistically expect to happen, not fantasy. It's frustrating to see people like Pelosi, experienced politicians who know what they are doing, get crucified for stating that fact.

          3 votes
  2. [2]
    nic
    (edited )
    Link
    The hypocrisy is utterly mind blowing. Trump retaining his business and refusing to release tax returns vs President Carters peanut farm. Trumps illegal hush money payments for an affair with a...

    The hypocrisy is utterly mind blowing.

    Trump retaining his business and refusing to release tax returns vs President Carters peanut farm.

    Trumps illegal hush money payments for an affair with a porn star and obstruction of justice vs Clintons lying about a blow job in the Whitehouse.

    Trumps family in the Whitehouse using private emails vs Hillary in the Whitehouse using a private email server.

    Trumps cozy/cosy relationship with Russia and North Korea vs the outrage at Obama suggesting negotiation with North Korea.

    Trumps "national emergency" and defiance of House subpoenas vs Obama's supposed over reach.

    Not to mention the constant "deficits matter" when democrats are in charge but "deficits don't matter" when republicans have the credit card.

    Trump taking credit for everything good and blaming others for everything bad vs Obama supposedly taking credit for killing Osama Bin Laden.

    Ten Benghazi investigations vs outrage over continued investigation of Trump in regards to Russian interference.

    6 votes
    1. GnomeChompski
      Link Parent
      The way you wrote that reminds me of Billy Joel's song, We Didn't Start the Fire. I really wish someone would do an updated version, but with shameless honest bite. You know, the kind that shines...

      The way you wrote that reminds me of Billy Joel's song, We Didn't Start the Fire. I really wish someone would do an updated version, but with shameless honest bite. You know, the kind that shines light on the dark corners of life today.

      1 vote