/Satire
Yet completely plausible.
7 Likes
Maybe. He’s made his happiness to murder pretty clear and they still voted for him. He’s pretty sure he "could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody and wouldn’t lose any voters, ok? It’s, like, incredible.”
5 Likes
Lt. Calley, of the My Lai massacre:
“I was ordered to go in there and destroy the enemy. That was my job that day. That was the mission I was given. I did not sit down and think in terms of men, women, and children. They were all classified as the same, and that’s the classification that we dealt with over there, just as the enemy. I felt then and I still do that I acted as I was directed, and I carried out the order that I was given and I do not feel wrong in doing so.”
5 Likes
Why have three branches of government? We only need the one branch.
Citation needed Mr Trump.
Just a friendly reminder that the narrative is being lead by the right here. The idea that one must apply for citizenship is one that should be questioned. This nation was founded on the idea that anyone could come and be a part of Team USA. It wasn’t until we passed extremely racist immigration laws that this changed. The basis of our immigration laws and the idea of applying to become part of Team USA is simply a false narrative that we need to push back against.
There is no shortage of space. There is no shortage of resources. There is no shortage of opportunity. There is no reason to tell someone they cannot become a part of our nation.
10 Likes
That brought to mind this:
They are counting on “us” to be the “better” people, and at this point I honestly feel there is no bottom to how low they will go.
I’m trying to think of “extra-legal” methods of fighting back that don’t involve literal fighting back.
Unanimous refusal to pay taxes?
Although I’ve already paid my taxes this year, so that would have to wait until next year for me to participate. But that’s about the closest way I can think of at this moment for “we, the people” to stage a non-violent strike against the government that they would feel. And even then, the Koch brothers and their ilk could fund things long enough for the rabble to be brought to their knees, if they wanted to.
I don’t know. It’s quite a mess. It would be nice to believe the democratic process can save us from where we are heading, but the corruption runs deep, including in how our votes are counted.
6 Likes
Democrats can already impeach him, now, in the House. [Article I, Section 2, Clause 5]
Democrats will never have the required 67 votes to convict him, in the Senate. [Article I, Section 3, Clause 6]
2 Likes
Unless I’m remembering incorrectly, Democrats can pass a declaration of intent to impeach, which then goes to the Senate for the actual impeachment trial proceedings. In other words, it’s a non-starter that will have as much impact as the Republican Congress voting to declare how much they hate Obamacare over and over again.
4 Likes
And a stout rope on that branch, to hang American democracy with.
1 Like
Weird flex but okay
Posting a Wikipedia link doesn’t really change the fact that, unless I’m mistaken (and I may be), the impeachment process starts in the House and then goes to the Senate.
2 Likes
Thanks, I wasn’t aware of what the actual numbers were in either house, nor how many seats were in play for 2020 in the Senate. I suppose there is a remote chance some Republicans could actually vote to impeach if it got that far (what? stop laughing!)
2 Likes
Remember, there’s a portrait of Andrew Jackson in the Oval Office. Remember Jackson’s reaction to a Supreme Court decision he didn’t like. Now keep an eye out for changes in the top ranks of the Marshals Service.
3 Likes
Of course, things were vastly different in 1830s than they are now, and Trump is no Andrew Jackson. (For all of his bad qualities, Jackson was obviously a highly competent man, and would have nothing but scorn for Trump if they were somehow to meet.)
1 Like
Well, the constitution is pretty clear about who the Executive and Legislative branches report to in the org chart. It’s just that the entity in question – the people – have in large part chosen to take that responsibility as a big old joke.
Not a funny or clever joke, obvs. I mean the kind of “joke” Turmp tells, where not even he thinks it’s funny, and no one smiles, but it’s really mean and crude so, ha ha, it was a joke.
2 Likes
It must irk him to be forced to consistent where it costs him money.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/01/us/trump-workers-fired.html
Then again, now he can probably find someone to fill out a stack of foreign worker permits for him.
2 Likes
You remember incorrectly. The house impeaches (see Clinton) the senate convicts and removes. Unless the repubs turn on him (highly unlikely at this point. If they haven’t, they won’t) impeachment is political show but no effect. (See Clinton)
3 Likes
Right, that’s exactly what I’m saying. The House makes an impeachment declaration but it’s up to the Senate to actually go through with the hearings to find wrongdoing and have any sort of actionable consequences. So, sure, they can waste time saying “we impeach him!” but as Pelosi said, it’s not really worth the effort.
5 Likes
It might be cheaper, but it ain’t easier. Almost impossible, in fact.
It will, but not because of her leaving.
Noble creatures and fungi, living out their life cycles in the context of evolution, blameless.
Wish Turmp voters were half that.
This is my new favorite typo, please don’t change it. It’s almost… soothing … compared to the seething induced by the correct spelling.
1 Like
