Michael Tracey misses the point of the abrupt ending of the Impeachment trial
Watch this video and see that Michael Tracey completely misunderstands what is going on here. This is not a matter of legality. This impeachment travesty is a total fuck-up. Trump is more popular, the campaign funds for his and down-ticket Repugs are swelling, the Repugs are more united. Yeah. The operating principle is not integrity. It is not Justice. It is not the revelation of Truth. This is pure politics, Michael. You don't get it, obviously. The whole thing is camouflage for Orange Hatred Outrage versus MAGA. This is not a matter of right versus wrong.
The part of this laconic video opening monologue is Tracey's puzzlement that the Trial should be prolonged by the presence of witnesses. Sure, that's what would happen if the Imposter Impeachment were actually judicial. But having witnesses would uncover many skeletons--not just Biden's or even Obama's. Too many bones lying around on public display.
[video:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h9Glc0QjL00]
The point is to terminate the whole charade before the State of the Union Address. What a platform--Trump will boast that he was right--etc., etc, witch hunt, sham, etc. Do you think legality has anything to do with this circus?
Tracey cannot be that dense, can he? Guys with this level of understanding belong on CNN intellectually (even if their ideologies are so opposite).
Giving the State of the Union after acquittal will allow Trump to unleash wrath which has potential for enormous retribution.
Watch out, you Dems. Watch out for the Devil's Right Hand.
Comments
Zum Heulen - I read in the German Magazine Der Spiegel
a piece that showed they play on the threat to be aware of the devil's left hand, Sanders being the same as Trumps devil's right hand. That's the end of it for me.
Der Spiegel becoming a piece of propaganda shit of the neo-liberal kind, yack.
I remember Meteor Blades once said that Der Spiegel was a neo-liberal outlet and I couldn't understand his opinion.
I remembered "Der Spiegel" from the sixties and seventies. It was in my opinion a truthdigging, critical, oppositional publication in comparios to most of the rest of the printed papers.
Having not lived in Germany from 1980 to 2017, I missed all of the changes that happened in Germany. Now, being here in Germany I am just shocked and disgusted by what I see here.
Es ist zum Heulen. (Heulen = crying)
Can't believe that Michael Tracey is my age (according to the Wikipage). No grey hair? His talk is also "Zum Heulen". All of it is just so damn awful und "Zum Heulen"
I pray for miracles to happen.
Michael Tracey could compete with Joe Biden for boringness
But he truly missed the real point of the sham's looming, abrupt termination has NOTHING to do with laws or justice.
I have to admit to not following this sham
Since I believe it was nothing but an attempted coup. Dershowitz plainly pointed this sham out when he listed nearly all of the Presidents, name by name, as having been accused of abuse of power by their opposition, and what their supposed abuses of power were.
The actual tweet of Rand Paul is interesting and so are the comments. Many accuse Rand Paul of asking Justice Roberts a question that would confirm that Eric Ciarmella was the whistleblower and thus outing Ciarmella. Question gets out Ciarmella is outed. Question disallowed and Ciarmella is outed by implication. Paul's accusers claim that Paul is guilty of the crime of outing a whistlebower.
Normally Senators are immune from prosecution when questions are asked or things are mentioned on the senate floor that would lead to prosecution if mentioned somewhere else. Think of reading the Pentagon papers on the senate floor, by Senator Gravel, when thinking immunity.
What Roberts did, by refusing to ask the question, actually took away Paul's right to have senatorial immunity from prosecution. Paul was then forced to state his question outside of the senate. Since he should have been allowed to do in the senate with immunity, he should still have immunity mentioning it in public.
That's my analysis anyway -- and I think it was a smart move of genius by Rand Paul to go around Roberts. Whistleblower outed. Well we have no protection for our whistleblowers anyway (ask Chelsea Manning) so what difference does gutting the whistleblower law make?
That said, I am still not up to speed about whether or not impeachment is over or not. I can't see the Republicans wanting it over. Impeachment puts Sanders and Warren in impeachment prison while Biden is free to campaign. And impeachment just allows the Senate to constantly beat up Biden for months.
The Democrats are so fucking stupid. Hoisted on their own petard of social justice warrior bullshit and hatred and envy of white men of Christian background.
Since when do they care about the Christian bit?
My observation is that this...craze...is, if anything, a kind of secularized Catholicism with a thin, garish layer of blue painted over. What we seem to be looking at here is a corporatist attempt to do with "wokies" what they did with the Religious Right in the 1970s (not to mention the theft-and-vandalism of the counterculture in the form of things like "Up With People"). Meanwhile, why are the people currently making noise about "feminism" (who always remind me of what Mark Twain said about the radical of one century being the conservative of the next) who will do whatever necessary to find sexism in friggin' Dr. Who, yet not a word even politely inquiring as to why the Catholic Church still won't ordain women.
In the Land of the Blind, the One-Eyed Man is declared mentally ill for describing colors.
Yes Virginia, there is a Global Banking Conspiracy!
I was not raised Catholic
I was raised Presbyterian (liberal protestant) though I have been an avowed atheist since about the age of 20. My comment is from a protestant point of view. There are still far more Protestants in the US than Catholics. At least for now. What I see by the Democrats is disdain for Protestant ideas and white men. They are the proverbial deplorables.
The irony to me as a lawyer is that the Constitution was written by Protestants, many of whom were deists, but still Protestant in background (like atheist/Protestants like me of today are), and today we have a Supreme Court that is made up of Catholics and Jews. (Recently, one Protestant was put on the Court). It is truly bizarre to me that Catholics and Jews have become the interpreters of a document written by Protestants all seeking to determine original intent when they seem clueless about Protestantism.
Since I was not raised as a Catholic, I really can't speak for them. But damn, Protestant men think the Democrats hate them. And the backlash of white Protestants (liberal and conservative) sure shows up in how they vote in rural America. Often the complaint of the Democrats is why do these people vote against their interest? What do you expect people to do if they feel hated and despised? Do you expect them to trust you when you give all indications that you hate and despise them?
I would be interested in how Catholics think as well; do Catholics think the Democrats despise them to? Is that why Republican Catholics are now the majority of the Supreme Court?
Roberts was just plain wrong -
Yes, it's my understanding that a Senator in this hearing is immune from prosecution no matter what he/she says. The fact that it would have forced Roberts to utter the whistleblower's name is immaterial. I haven't heard Paul object to this action in an interview, but it would not have even been a "test" of the immunity because of the fact that he is permitted to say "anything" - we will eventually need this type of unlocking a government secret somewhere down the road and this establishment of precedent may prevent it in the future.
Peace
FN
"Democracy is technique and the ability of power not to be understood as oppressor. Capitalism is the boss and democracy is its spokesperson." Peace - FN
Yowsir
.
What a great, constitutionally-protected way to reveal any truth. You can bet the Dd and the Rs do not let this become a greater issue. If Rand takes a complaint to McConnell about not having his question read aloud by Roberts, then a large mess could occur for both parties.
It is odd when you think about it
That the immunity protection is invoked so seldom. Gravel did it with the Pentagon papers, but there has been little usage of it since. It certainly is a means to make full disclosure.
But of course, too much disclosure gets you elites doing everything in their political and monetary power to make sure your re-election campaign is decimated.
Ach, nein, nicht Der Spiegel!!!
I was hoping that was one of the few remaining bastions - last I'd heard of them, they were reporting stuff like this: https://www.spiegel.de/international/zeitgeist/locals-say-coca-cola-orig...
In the Land of the Blind, the One-Eyed Man is declared mentally ill for describing colors.
Yes Virginia, there is a Global Banking Conspiracy!
well, I think their authors are of a wide variety
(a little bit like here), but they are not a bastion one can always count on. Or I had just bad luck to run into stuff that I definitely would not have expected to read tin here. It's in German, anyway.
And I am too down to continue about it. I have the tendency to draw conclusions about a whole by just considering some single incident. Something I should not do. I did this before and have been wrong. So, just go on. Nothing worth in here mentioning.
The Michael Tracey under discussion
is just a little over 30 years old. The other Tracey is someone else.
Lurking in the wings is Hillary, like some terrifying bat hanging by her feet in a cavern below the DNC. A bat with theropod instincts. -- Fred Reed https://tinyurl.com/vgvuhcl
The poor thing
must still naively believe we have laws and justice in America. Where has he been - especially since 2016 - all these years? Can you say - head buried in sand? Perhaps. He's gonna be one pissed off dude when he realizes out government is really all a sham.
"The “jumpers” reminded us that one day we will all face only one choice and that is how we will die, not how we will live." Chris Hedges on 9/11
I just read the headlines and some anti-Russian speeches
I don't think there was any politics or legal stuff about the origins of impeachment. At its base it became a way for the House democrats to channel/express their blind hatred and rage at Trump. What some of the House impeachment managers said about Russia and Putin was totally unhinged Cold War bullshit. Impeachment turned into an attempt to pay back Trump based on their paranoid rantings about Putin and Trump. They acted more like a significant other who found out the partner cheated on them with a brother or sister. You know, and then trashed the cheaters car.
I am afraid that the vitrol will be turned on Bernie Sanders and Tulsi next.
Your fears will be realized.
The Dems are and have been coming for Bernie and Tulsi since 2016. No news there. The problem for the Dems is the "Or Bust" movements; those assemblages of people they won't support any candidate in the General Election but their own. Should preferred candidate not prevail, the Or Bust people are gonna sit out the GE on the couch, drinking beer, watching football or YouTube. Lots of animosity between Warrenites, Berniecrats, or ByeDone fans. Just imagine if 10% of each group is Or Bust, then that's lots of sit at home folks.
That is what Justice Warrior shit does for the entire party
Divide and conquer. Really easy to do with so little homogeneity.