19 thoughts on “News/Politics 1-20-21

  1. Sorry Dems, the window has closed.

    https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2021/01/19/dershowitz_the_senate_can_not_legally_put_citizen_trump_on_trial.html

    “ALAN DERSHOWITZ, FORMER TRUMP IMPEACHMENT DEFENSE TEAM MEMBER: It will be unconstitutional, but that probably won’t bother the senators.

    The Constitution is very clear. The subject, the object, the purpose of impeachment is to remove a sitting precedent. And there are two precedents. One is very obvious. When President Nixon resigned in anticipation of being impeached and removed, there was no effort to impeach him after he left office. It was clear that the Senate had lost jurisdiction at that point.

    The proponents cite another precedent. In 1876, there was a failed effort, a failed effort to remove the secretary of war. In an initial vote, the Senate voted close, in a close vote, that they did have jurisdiction to try somebody who had resigned.

    But then, when it came to a vote on the merits, they lost, because 27 or so senators voted that they did not have jurisdiction. Those senators were right. There is no jurisdiction. You cannot put citizen Trump on trial. If you could do that, it would be a bill of attainder, number one, putting somebody on trial who was not a sitting president.

    And, number two, the implications would be horrendous. It would mean that if, the Republicans came up with a terrific candidate, say, not Donald Trump, to run against President Biden in 2024, the Democrats could simply impeach him.

    If you can impeach anyone who is not a sitting president, there are no limits to the power of the Congress to try ordinary citizens. It is plainly unconstitutional. And the Senate should not proceed with this unconstitutional act.”

    Like

  2. Done in by the traitor faction of the party.

    https://legalinsurrection.com/2021/01/nbc-poll-trump-retains-overwhelming-republican-support-overall-job-approval-steady-since-election/

    “NBC Poll: Trump Retains Overwhelming Republican Support, Overall Job Approval Steady Since Election

    “Almost 9 in 10 Republicans — 87 percent — give Trump a thumbs-up””

    The media has bombarded us with headlines that President Trump will leave office with his lowest approval rating (the number most often cited is Pew’s 29%). An interesting thing happens, however, when pollsters poll registered voters instead of whoever answers a phone.

    Rasmussen, a polling outfit that polls likely—not just registered—voters, has Trump’s approval at 48%.

    Here are just a few of the headlines that have popped up in recent days:

    NY Times: “Trump will leave office with his lowest approval rating ever”
    CNN: “Trump finishes with worst first term approval rating ever”
    Axios: “Trump set to leave office with the lowest approval ratings of his presidency”
    USA Today: “Trump leaves White House with his lowest-ever approval rating after Capitol riot, impeachment”
    The goal of these headlines, I suspect, is to imply that Trump has lost more support among Republicans than he really has.

    According to an NBC News poll of registered voters, Trump’s approval is significantly higher than the Pew poll of “5,360 U.S. adults,” coming in at 43%.

    In their article entitled “Trump approval remains stable in new NBC poll, with Republicans unmoved after Capitol violence,” NBC News reports:”

    A new NBC News poll found that 43 percent of voters nationwide gave Trump a positive job approval rating, just barely down from 45 percent who said the same before the November election and the 44 percent who approved of his performance shortly after he took office in 2017.

    . . . . Almost 9 in 10 Republicans — 87 percent — give Trump a thumbs-up, compared with 89 percent who said the same before the November election.

    . . . . Among Republicans who say their primary loyalty is to Trump over the party, 98 percent approve of his performance. For those who say they prioritize the party over the president, his approval still stands at 81 percent — virtually unchanged from October. (The findings contrast with some other recent national polls showing Trump’s job rating lower. Unlike other surveys that sampled all U.S. adults, NBC News’ poll surveyed registered voters.)”

    Like

  3. Gas on the fire.

    Just feel the unity….

    ———–

    Hack Tapper would approve.

    Like

  4. Today begins a new era. An era of slobbering “journalists” doing their best to one up each other in @#$ kissing.

    I think I’m gonna puke.

    ———-

    ———–

    Like

  5. Re: the first post – What I am wondering is if what has changed over the years could have the effect of modifying the words of impeachment. When that was written, I don’t think it was included that former presidents would get a lifetime pension and a security detail. (I may be mistaken about the pension, but I know that the Secret Service was not around then.)

    So, if a president cannot be impeached – which would strip from him those financial perks, and some others – once he is no longer in office, then we could have the situation in which a president does something egregious and undoubtedly would be convicted in an impeachment trial, but quickly resigns, and keeps all those perks at the expense of the taxpayer.

    That has me wondering if the changes to the status of former presidents would change the meaning of the rules for impeachment. If they don’t currently, then I would think an amendment would be wise, at least for the possibility of a future president doing what I described.

    Like

  6. Tucker telling it like it is…

    [video src="https://media.gab.com/system/media_attachments/files/062/483/664/original/12effb2fa7ceec5d.mp4" /]

    Like

  7. Kizzie,

    “Re: the first post – What I am wondering is if what has changed over the years could have the effect of modifying the words of impeachment. ”

    That would take a constitutional amendment, which clearly never happened. Your point is moot.

    Like

  8. The Purge continues.

    Print truth, get purged.

    https://www.oann.com/twitter-suspends-michelle-malkin-gateway-pundit-right-side-broadcasting-network-accounts/

    “Twitter Suspends Michelle Malkin, Gateway Pundit, Right Side Broadcasting Network Accounts”

    “Twitter suspended yet another stack of conservative accounts. This occurred less than two weeks after the hashtag “hang Mike Pence” was allowed to trend on the platform for a whole night and hit over 14,000 tweets.

    On Tuesday, conservative activist Michelle Malkin took to Telegram to announce Twitter had locked her account without following typical protocol, which would require an explanation of the suspension and opportunity to delete posts violating Twitter policy.

    The political commentator asserted her profile’s 24-hour suspension was politically motivated and pointed to her account’s final tweet. In her last post, she warned Americans about censorship on mass media platforms. She noted these restrictions go against the spirit of the Constitution.

    This followed a 2019 interview, where she called attention to Big Tech’s short-sighted attempts to lump millions of conservatives and a small minority of extremists into a single category.

    “The lines have been blurred between ordinary American patriots, whatever their color is and some fringe element that people like media matters and the southern poverty law center are trying to lump us all in as.”

    Meanwhile, a spokesperson for Twitter confirmed Malkin’s 24-hour suspension on Tuesday in addition to that of accounts belonging to conservative media outlets Right Side Broadcasting Network and the Gateway Pundit. While the official cited violation of a civic integrity policy as the reason for the three suspensions, they did not specify which tweets defied the so-called guidelines.”

    Liked by 1 person

  9. AJ – You wrote, “That would take a constitutional amendment, which clearly never happened. Your point is moot.”

    My comment ended with: “That has me wondering if the changes to the status of former presidents would change the meaning of the rules for impeachment. If they don’t currently, then I would think an amendment would be wise, at least for the possibility of a future president doing what I described.”

    I was not making a definite point, but pointing out how things have changed and that an amendment might be in order.

    Like

  10. At the end of November, a lawsuit was filed in Antrim Co., MI, challenging the election results there. A judge actually allowed them to take forensic images of the Dominion software system. They put out a report on Dec 14, detailing forensic evidence that the Dominion system was purposely and intentionally designed to create election fraud. They now have discovery (!), including being able to look at Big Tech’s involvement. They believe that they’ll be able to actually decertify the election result in Michigan. Who knows what that will mean in other states, and the wider effect…

    Liked by 2 people

  11. I was suspended from Twitter for three weeks for “violating community values.”

    What tweet? What did I say? Which community value?

    They never answered.

    Three weeks later, without explanation, Twitter decided I could return.

    If I, who never post anything political, could get into trouble– for what?–anyone could.

    Liked by 3 people

  12. Maybe they thought you were Michelle Malkin…..

    I say this again and again do these right wing commentators not understand private property and private businesses. When you sign up for a social media account you agree to terms of service. Nobody reads them but Im sure it says they can suspend or terminate your account for whatever reason. And they do.

    Capitalism gives us a multitude of different sites to post our thoughts — facebook, instagram, twitter, reddit, tiktok, pinterest, blogspot, etc etc. Follow their terms of service and post away. However, you are not entitled to use a corporation’s private property without permission or violating their rules. Its no different than being banned by a bar, store, shopping mall or other private-public place for bad behaviour. The only way to change ther rules is to involve the gov’t in private business and then the gov’t decideds what is protected speech, but I thought the right was opposed to government intervention.

    If Republicans are now okay with gov’t interevention, I hear Bernie Sanders has a few ideas how to interfere in private businesses. And of course so do — insurance, health care, wi fi, and others all nationalized and controlled by the gov’t. If the price is giving Trump a twitter account, I’m sure Sanders would agree.

    Like

  13. From what I understand, Trump is alreay impeached. The debate should be whether he can be tried by the Senate. I suppose thats a matter for the Senate and probably the Supreme Court to decide. Once the process is started, it should be completed or a quick resignation is a get out of jail card. When HR begins the process of firing a person (in which case finiancial penalties ie pension may occur) saying you can’t fire me I quit won’t stop or change the process. Something similar may apply here.

    Personally, I think he should have been impeached when he openly broke the emoulements clause. His hotel and golf courses all made money frome business he personally directly their way. Obviously pressuring Ukraine for dirt on his opponents is even worse. I’m not quite sure the current impeachment is technically appropriate — incitement to riot is difficult to prove — correlation does not equal causation. I heard clips from a House Republican from Alabama who spoke to the same rally and I thougth his speech qualified more than Trump’s. Is there a process for removing a representative? Or is a criminal charge from law enforcement necessary?

    A call for unity without responsiblity is merely sweeping things under the carpet. The January 6th incident should be thoroughly investigated and parties made responsible. The fact that several House reps and Senators still objected to the vote count despite knowing the incitement this caused is a problem and an impediment to unity. Curz et al need to admit resposible for the politcal games that corelated to the riot.

    Trump’s approval rating in the RCP avearage is 41%. Rasmussen consistently over polls Republicans, shave 3-5% off any poll they produce. Prior to the election they polled Biden and Trump as equal — Biden won the popular vote by 4.4% roughly the RCP average without Rasmussen and Trafalgar. The polls were in fact accurate. Trump has never cracked 50% in the RCP average and in both elections he lost the popular vote. Here’s some historical comparisions
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_approval_rating#Historical_comparison

    Like

  14. Sure the media is nice to Biden; after all he doesnt call them an enemy of the people. I am waiting to see how long it takes for Fox and the right wing media to blame Biden for Trump’s mess.

    Timothy Snyder is one of the best historians of the inter war period and 20th century ideologies. I’ve always viewed Trump as a Mussolini/Franco wanna-be but US institutions managed to prevent it Here’s his thoughts on Jam 6th worth a read (and no he’s not some leftist) https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/09/magazine/trump-coup.html

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.