Live Impeachment Hearings

Reopened October 2019 - includes archived threads from pre-2019

Live Impeachment Hearings

Postby toucana on November 13th, 2019, 11:17 am 

Day 1

Live impeachment hearings have begun in Congress. For those not located in the USA, a CNN Live feed of the proceedings is currently available on:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ulWTJUQsVY
User avatar
toucana
Chatroom Operator
 
Posts: 1509
Joined: 20 Sep 2006
Location: Bristol UK
Blog: View Blog (10)


Re: Live Impeachment Hearings

Postby charon on November 13th, 2019, 11:45 am 

But the real question is whether it has the slightest chance of succeeding...
charon
Active Member
 
Posts: 1956
Joined: 02 Mar 2011


Re: Live Impeachment Hearings

Postby jocular on November 13th, 2019, 1:45 pm 

charon » November 13th, 2019, 11:45 am wrote:But the real question is whether it has the slightest chance of succeeding...

It is an important question but not necessarily the "real" question.

There are other reasons for taking this path whether or not it is ultimately successful in removing the present stain from the office of the Presidency.
jocular
Member
 
Posts: 161
Joined: 29 Feb 2016


Re: Live Impeachment Hearings

Postby Serpent on November 13th, 2019, 1:52 pm 

It's already succeeding. You can't ask for a better witness than Bill taylor: he's accurate, articulate and careful.
No sane, reasonable and honest American can spin these revelations in any way other than what it actually is.
If a majority of the senate is none of the above, the sl......g won't be removed from the highest office in the land, and then we'll see how many of the voters - well, actually, the electoral college - approve of this kind of behaviour in the person representing them to the world. If the majority of Americans approve of the sl......g, then they deserve him. (In which case, God help the minority!)
Serpent
Resident Member
 
Posts: 3797
Joined: 24 Dec 2011


Re: Live Impeachment Hearings

Postby TheVat on November 13th, 2019, 5:31 pm 

George Kent is as good a witness as Taylor. Very sharp, dedicated, career diplomat. Don't let that crooked bowtie fool you. And Taylor brought some new material, since his last appearance before the closed hearings a few weeks ago - the phonecall between Sondland and Trump seems particularly damning. In courts, people are convicted on hearsay frequently - Taylor's testimony makes clear why this is the case. If you're in the right place and know the right people, you can connect dots very credibly. I just hope the people are watching. And that they realize this: attempted extortion is still a crime. It doesn't have to succeed. And it's still a betrayal of the public trust i.e. our confidence that our President will act only in our national interest when dealing with foreign leaders and governments and not his own personal interest.

The questioners did a good job of bring out the fact that Trump never, despite GOP claims, had any real interest in corruption overall in Ukraine. He wasn't holding any aid money back in 2017 or 2018, on that hook. His only interest was in obtaining fictitious dirt on the Bidens, when he knew that Joe was likely to be his rival in 2020. So, all of sudden, in 2019, vital military assistance is being withheld. Hmm. Curious, that.

Rep. Welch, of Vermont, got in a nice quip. Check it out, if you have time. Jim Jordan doesn't really ask a question with his time slots, just rants on and on like a partisan hack revisiting his Irrelevant Innuendo Greatest Hits. At some point, most viewers are going to realize that the guy who just spends all his time on partisan attacks and trying to resuscitate long-debunked conspiracy theories (like Jordan or Nunes) probably has nothing of real substance to add, or a real question to ask of the witnesses. Of course, substantive questions are going to get them answers they really don't like.

In a way, this all reveals the advantages of closed-door hearings (ironically enough). There's no camera to play to, no electorate to bullshit, so things move along much more quickly and get to the important points.
User avatar
TheVat
Forum Administrator
 
Posts: 7271
Joined: 21 Jan 2014
Location: Black Hills


Re: Live Impeachment Hearings

Postby Serpent on November 13th, 2019, 6:12 pm 

In fact, Kent was probably the better witness. At the time of that post, I hadn't heard him yet.
Later on, I was working in another room, and I could easily tell which party each cross-examiner was: the Republicans kept making speeches at their base - which I suppose is why they wanted it made public; that, and to set witnesses up for the most extreme components of that same base to attack. I have no doubt that's a serious threat. They also kept 'withdrawing' irrelevant and accusatory questions, once their imaginary jury had had its titter at the witnesses' expense.
Schiff did well to give them a chance to respond. Did well in general, I thought: kept the proceedings calm, on point and on time.
Serpent
Resident Member
 
Posts: 3797
Joined: 24 Dec 2011


Re: Live Impeachment Hearings

Postby toucana on November 16th, 2019, 6:03 am 

In other news this Friday:-

Long-time Trump adviser Roger Stone was convicted on all seven felony charges he was facing in Washington DC.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-50438196

The charges included five counts of lying to Congress, one count of witness intimidation, and one count of obstructing a Congressional investigation. Witness tampering carries a sentence of up to 20 years in prison. The other counts can carry five years each.

Meanwhile over in Congress, chairman Adam Schiff interrupted the public hearing of former Ukraine ambassador Marie Yovanovitch to read out a hostile Tweet against the ambassador just posted by president Trump, and accused him of witness intimidation against a sitting witness.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-50428537

The ambassador subsequently received a standing ovation from the public gallery at the end of her testimony.

Republican sources are saying that this week’s public impeachment hearings are ‘boring’ and that Trump was ’too busy to watch them’, in spite of tweeting about them up to 60 times a day.

https://www.businessinsider.com/republicans-dismiss-impeachment-hearings-as-boring-2019-11?r=US&IR=T
User avatar
toucana
Chatroom Operator
 
Posts: 1509
Joined: 20 Sep 2006
Location: Bristol UK
Blog: View Blog (10)


Re: Live Impeachment Hearings

Postby Serpent on November 16th, 2019, 9:25 am 

Republican sources are saying that this week’s public impeachment hearings are ‘boring’ and that Trump was ’too busy to watch them’, in spite of tweeting about them up to 60 times a day.

Well, they're partly right. The parts where they kept standing up to read irrelevant old newspaper articles and praise Trump's foreign policy (!!!?) and complain that they'd been "interrupted" while interrupting others - yes, those bits were quite tedious.
They have nothing; they know they have nothing, but they're trying to mount the defense their leader demand. May Something have mercy on their deeply mortgaged souls!
Serpent
Resident Member
 
Posts: 3797
Joined: 24 Dec 2011


Re: Live Impeachment Hearings

Postby toucana on November 20th, 2019, 11:24 am 

So just now this Wednesday 20th November, ambassador Gordon Sondland told Congress in his opening statement that the Ukraine aid quid pro quo was offered on the express instructions of president Trump.

https://edition.cnn.com/politics/live-news/impeachment-hearing-11-20-19/index.html

Sondland's statement implicates everyone, president Trump, vice president Pence, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and Rudy Guliani. "Everyone was in the loop, it was no secret" said the statement.

As president Trump supposedly said back in May 2017 when Robert Mueller was appointed as special counsel - "OMG - This is terrible. I'm f*ked. This is the end of my presidency".

Be interesting to see how the GOP committee members try to spin this one.
User avatar
toucana
Chatroom Operator
 
Posts: 1509
Joined: 20 Sep 2006
Location: Bristol UK
Blog: View Blog (10)


Re: Live Impeachment Hearings

Postby Serpent on November 20th, 2019, 1:21 pm 

Seems like a "nice guy", don't 'e? Though not a note-taker.
I'm forming a picture in my head of the Trump insiders, in their power-bubble. We're running the world now! When we say jump, heads of state ask "which hoop, sire?" I believe they really felt invincible - reminiscent of John Dean's testimony, back in the day.
In the end, I expect good ol' ubiquitous Rudy to carry the people's sins into the wilderness. (Maybe he always knew that was to be his role?)

What struck me today is none of the people involved in these hearings seem to give so much as a passing thought to how they're trashing the international credibility of a friendly government - in fact, the first half-way decent administration Ukraine has had in decades. President Yang will have to do some major damage control!
Serpent
Resident Member
 
Posts: 3797
Joined: 24 Dec 2011


Re: Live Impeachment Hearings

Postby toucana on November 22nd, 2019, 6:35 am 

So how did they do ?


Lt.- Colonel Alexander Vindman A+
Reminded a visually impaired ranking member Devin Nunes that a military officer appearing in uniform was entitled to be addressed by the rank clearly inscribed on the name card in front of him, and not as ‘Mr. Vindman’.

Fiona Hill A++
Took a baseball bat to the half-witted cockamamie conspiracy theories peddled by GOP members who tried to argue that Ukraine not Russia had meddled in the 2016 US presidential election. Russia happens to be Fiona Hill’s specialised subject. She doesn’t need to phone a friend, take a 50-50 option, or ask the audience. She has an eidetic memory and a perfect mastery of her subject. The GOP were scared of her to the point where they stopped even trying to ask her any more questions.

Ambassador Gordon Sondland C+
On his third attempt at trying to square his testimony with reality, ambassador Sondland decided that he really would like to go back to his former career as a hotelier, as opposed to spending the next seven years in a federal penitentiary after being convicted of perjury and obstruction charges. Once he began telling the truth, he apparently found it rather hard to stop. “Yes there was a quid pro quo, “The instructions came from president Trump”, and “It was no secret. Everybody was in the loop” etc. The real gem is that Sondland was originally called as a minority witness. He was someone the Republicans wanted to appear in the live hearings, because they thought he would deliver testimony that could be used to exonerate Trump.

David Holmes B+
Provided a matter-of-fact validation of the content of the unfortunate cell phone call placed by ambassador Sondland on 26 July from the public terrace of a restaurant in Kiev to president Trump in the White House. As all three of the major telcos in Ukraine are either owned or controlled by Russia, the committee might just as easily have asked Russian intelligence for a recording and transcript of that call (It would have probably been easier than trying to subpoena the documents from the White House). The most interesting part of his testimony was watching the interrogators trying to keep on top of exactly which euphemism they were supposed to be using at any given moment to capture Sondland’s expressive use of the vernacular. Was it ‘Blank’ - ‘Expletive Deleted’ - ‘Fig’ - or simply ‘A** and ’S**t’ ?

Marie Yovanovitch A+
The former US ambassador to Ukraine described her 30 year career as a diplomat in such quiet and compelling terms that one critic called her “the person you would ring if you were locked up in a police cell and had only one phone call”.
- “Would you not agree that the president is entitled to dismiss whoever he pleases?” they asked .
- “Yes” she replied “But I don’t understand why he needed to smear my reputation”.
- “That wasn’t the question I asked” said a confused GOP hack before abruptly standing down.
Ambassador Yovanovitch received a standing ovation from the public gallery when she finished her testimony.

Ambassador William Taylor A+
His opening resumé described an education at West Point, military service in the 101st Airborne regiment in Vietnam, and an unblemished 50 year career in the State department, before he was recalled from retirement by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo to become acting ambassador to Ukraine. The substance of his testimony systematically dismantled and shredded every single impeachment defense the White House had to offer. President Trump was apparently so furious with Mike Pompeo for hiring someone of such unimpeachable integrity, that he suffered a conniption bad enough to land him in Walter Reed Army Medical Centre for the weekend with chest pains and hyperventilation issues.

George Kent B+
A senior State department expert on Ukranian affairs who by all accounts was wearing the most impressive and snazziest bow-tie on display. His oversize water bottle was also voted MVP by the NYT. George Kent methodically identified Rudy Giuliani as the ‘patient zero’ in the infection that had contaminated the body politic of American foreign policy in Ukraine.
User avatar
toucana
Chatroom Operator
 
Posts: 1509
Joined: 20 Sep 2006
Location: Bristol UK
Blog: View Blog (10)


Re: Live Impeachment Hearings

Postby Serpent on November 22nd, 2019, 12:07 pm 

Fiona Hill was magnificent!
I particularly relished the moment, after they stopped asking questions and started making mean, irrelevant, rambling speeches, when she crushed that attacker - Wenstrup?
I have literally never before seen a Republican blush. It made my whole week.
Serpent
Resident Member
 
Posts: 3797
Joined: 24 Dec 2011


Re: Live Impeachment Hearings

Postby TheVat on November 22nd, 2019, 1:52 pm 

I am positively smitten by that Durham coal miner's daughter and her lovely north country accent and her poise, intelligence, steely determination to get the facts right and brook no nonsense, and the way she reminds me of someone in one of those early Anglo-American portraits by Gilbert Stuart - like one of George Washington's cuter cousins. Fiona for President! (we need to change that silly American birth law)
User avatar
TheVat
Forum Administrator
 
Posts: 7271
Joined: 21 Jan 2014
Location: Black Hills


Re: Live Impeachment Hearings

Postby toucana on November 22nd, 2019, 8:37 pm 

Axios has published an interesting bar chart of of reactions to the televised live hearings.

https://www.axios.com/trump-impeachment-hearings-marie-yovanovitch-75a3ccf4-2e7a-4d57-b2a4-899d4842d6ac.html

The chart is based on interactions on Facebook (reactions comments and shares), and Twitter (retweets and likes).
User avatar
toucana
Chatroom Operator
 
Posts: 1509
Joined: 20 Sep 2006
Location: Bristol UK
Blog: View Blog (10)


Re: Live Impeachment Hearings

Postby charon on December 19th, 2019, 10:21 am 

You'll have to forgive me if, as Americans, you don't like this. I normally keep out of politics but this one seems to have caught my attention.

Vat and I have had this conversation before but I forget which thread it was now. I was saying then, about the Kavanaugh case, that I thought the Senate hearings were extraordinarily meaningless, just a lot of huff 'n puff and a foregone conclusion.

However, they pale into insignificance beside the prospect of Trump's trial by Senate. And it hasn't happened yet.

How much public money will it cost? How much media time? What is the point of it at all, even though it's part of the impeachment process?

If Trump has broken Constitutional law then he should be put in front of the Supreme Court. It should be done properly with evidence, witnesses, prosecution and defence, in front of unbiased judges who will rule according to law.

But what will happen in the Senate - if it's the same as the Kavanaugh thing - is not that. Apparently impeachment is not a criminal proceeding but a political one. Which strikes me as very odd because it's a matter of national security and a violation of the basis of the country's existence.

I can see why it's not strictly criminal in the sense he didn't steal something or murder anybody but breaking Constitutional law - I repeat law - is the very definition of criminality.

But that aside, what is the point of his appearance in the Senate? They will go through the motions and - because there are more Republicans than Democrats - rule in his favour. Which reduces the whole thing to a meaningless, futile, vainglorious farce.

Even the Washington Post and the New York Times admit that all the Democrats will vote against Trump and all the Republicans will vote for him. And thus they will win.

So what on earth is the point of it? Trump will continue as President and his 'high crimes' - note the word crimes - go unpunished, at least in the public eye. He might, in some circles, even be seen as a martyr.

This is not a trial at all, except in the sense of a farce that will test everybody's patience. It will no doubt provide a lot of amusement but is in the end meaningless simply because the conclusion is already known.

The senators have been described as 'jurors'. In a real trial they would all - every one of them - be barred because their bias makes them completely ineligible.

I'd be interested to hear your views. I may be missing something, of course, in which case I'll be happy to concede.
charon
Active Member
 
Posts: 1956
Joined: 02 Mar 2011


Re: Live Impeachment Hearings

Postby Forest_Dump on December 19th, 2019, 11:43 am 

Personally I think the train was set in motion quite some time ago with the only question being how the voting public would react. And itt appears that they, the public, haven't really changed their opinions much, if at all. Yes it was a foregone conclusion that the Dems would convict and the Republicans would support Trump so Trump will end up like Clinton - impeached but not removed going into the election. The only question, IMHO, hasn't changed and that will be who goes up as the Dem candidate and what happens then. IMHO, if a moderate Dem is the candidate, and/or the Republicans nominate someone else, then there might be a chance of healing following the next election. If the Dems nominate a more radical choice, the election will be a toss-up although I would give a slight edge to Trump to win, and I think the US will become more polarized with a greater chance of a breakup of the union in the near future.
User avatar
Forest_Dump
Resident Member
 
Posts: 8718
Joined: 31 Mar 2005
Location: Great Lakes Region


Re: Live Impeachment Hearings

Postby Serpent on December 19th, 2019, 1:11 pm 

charon » December 19th, 2019, 9:21 am wrote:How much public money will it cost?

As I understand it, the representatives are on salary, and they're doing the job they were hired to do, in a building dedicated to those proceedings. What's this about cost?
(1.4 000,000,000,000 for the military goes unquestioned)
How much media time?

As much as the media think the public is willing to watch. (It's no worse entertainment than yet another Frosty the Snowman movie or singers wearing idiotic, uncomfortably hot costumes.)
What is the point of it at all, even though it's part of the impeachment process?

The point is to show the voters how their elected officials represent their views.

If Trump has broken Constitutional law then he should be put in front of the Supreme Court.

If it had been written that way originally, that's what would have to be done. But it was written this way, so this is the way they are bound to do.

It should be done properly with evidence, witnesses,

Every effort was made to follow correct legal procedure.

prosecution and defence, in front of unbiased judges who will rule according to law.

That would be a trial. So far, all they've done is indict him. Congress is charged with the duties of a grand jury, and they have carried out that duty. The trial is to be held by the senate.

But what will happen in the Senate - if it's the same as the Kavanaugh thing - is not that.

Unfortunately, the gentlemen who were heaving up all those old graveyards yesterday, tossing and rolling in their sleep, did not foresee the detritus of Nixon/Kissinger/Rove.

Apparently impeachment is not a criminal proceeding but a political one.

It's not supposed to be 'political' in the sense that word is used now. It was supposed to be procedural. It was supposed to prevent the arrogation of power to any one man - which, at the the time, was presumed to be a concern to all parties.

I can see why it's not strictly criminal in the sense he didn't steal something or murder anybody but breaking Constitutional law - I repeat law - is the very definition of criminality.

That comes after. This part is just about removing an unworthy person from public office. Then he can be charged with civil crimes and tried in a regular court, with all of its rules and procedures. Point is, you can't have somebody both running the country and standing in the dock at the same time.

But that aside, what is the point of his appearance in the Senate? They will go through the motions and - because there are more Republicans than Democrats - rule in his favour. Which reduces the whole thing to a meaningless, futile, vainglorious farce.

Then something needs to change. If the separation of powers and established procedure no longer serve their intended purpose, then those bodies must be redefined, reorganized, reconstituted. Maybe the constitution needs to be re-written. Maybe the entire electoral process needs to be torn down and rebuilt.
But that hasn't happened yet. They can only work with what they currently have.

So what on earth is the point of it?

Showing the voters that some of their elected officials are still doing - or attempting to do - their jobs.

Trump will continue as President and his 'high crimes' - note the word crimes - go unpunished, at least in the public eye. He might, in some circles, even be seen as a martyr.

Yes, and that's telling us everything we need to know about the perversion of American politics at this point in its denouement. In case this wasn't enough to tell you where they're at https://www.spreadshirt.com/god+guns+trump+t-shirts

It will no doubt provide a lot of amusement but is in the end meaningless simply because the conclusion is already known.

A great deal of what we do, what we must do for our work, what is expected of us as citizens, what we are compelled to do by necessity, what we are impelled by conscience and duty to do, is meaningless - if meaning is judged by predictability of outcome.

It's not about whether they can successfully remove this mind-bogglingly bad president. They know they can't. They had three previous occasions to start this process and held up, precisely because the outcome was predictable and the gesture would be futile. But, once an official complaint was lodged, they had only two choices: to proceed according to constitutional protocol, or be negligent in their sworn duty.
I do not envy them.
But I admire the hell out of Adam Schiff.
Serpent
Resident Member
 
Posts: 3797
Joined: 24 Dec 2011


Re: Live Impeachment Hearings

Postby hyksos on December 19th, 2019, 1:41 pm 

Lt.- Colonel Alexander Vindman. Born in Ukraine to Ukrainian parents. Wounded in deployment as an American soldier. When asked by a representative, "Why did you do it?" the colonel replied, "In America, I still believe that right matters." A mic-drop followed by gallery applause. I was nearly moved to tears.
Image

Fiona Hill. She wrote a biography of Vladimir Putin; and not from a distance.
Image

Ambassador Gordon Sondland. Republicans expected this man to fall on his own sword for King Trump, Donald of Orange. The opposite happened. Sondland "threw Trump under the train". You could see them squirming in their seats trying to redirect.
Image

David Holmes. I was too busy with life to catch his testimony.
Image

Marie Yovanovitch. I wanted the Articles of Impeachment to contain witness intimidation. King Donald of Orange attacked this woman on social media with ferocity, asking his devout goose-stepping followers to join in with the smears and intimidation.

I point at the intimidation of Marie Yovanovitch as the political barometer of how numb and acclimated we have become to the train wreck that is Trump's presidency. I ask the reader to imagine of Barack Obama had attacked a white woman like this on social media or on camera. It would have been a wall-to-wall scandal by itself. Obama would have been led out of the White House in handcuffs. ("This is why you can't have a black man in high office", the jeers would say) When King Orange does it, we forget in three days because his presidency is that level of chaos.
Image


Ambassador William Taylor. Taylor's testimony was very early in the process. I listened to him speaking in my car as the inquiry opened up. It was here that I came to the realization that impeachment is real, and not just a temporary tactic of a few besmirched House Democrats. Also his voice should be used in movie trailers.
Image

George Kent. The world's leading expert on political corruption in Eastern Europe. By far my favorite testimony in the whole group.
Image
User avatar
hyksos
Active Member
 
Posts: 1712
Joined: 28 Nov 2014


Re: Live Impeachment Hearings

Postby charon on December 19th, 2019, 2:11 pm 

Serpent » December 19th, 2019, 6:11 pm wrote:Then something needs to change.


I'd say so.
Last edited by charon on December 19th, 2019, 3:03 pm, edited 2 times in total.
charon
Active Member
 
Posts: 1956
Joined: 02 Mar 2011


Re: Live Impeachment Hearings

Postby Serpent on December 19th, 2019, 3:01 pm 

I would like to see it change without Civil War II.
But then again, maybe the tornadoes and hurricanes and will sweep it all away. Then we can write that book II.
Serpent
Resident Member
 
Posts: 3797
Joined: 24 Dec 2011


Re: Live Impeachment Hearings

Postby charon on December 19th, 2019, 3:04 pm 

I'll tell you something, the evidence against Trump is overwhelming; the man is mired in corruption.

What's so frightening is that virtually the whole of the Republican party - United States Senators - is willing to aid and abet him. They should all be put on trial. It's that simple. Aiding and abetting a crime is a crime in itself.

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
charon
Active Member
 
Posts: 1956
Joined: 02 Mar 2011


Re: Live Impeachment Hearings

Postby Serpent on December 19th, 2019, 4:03 pm 

Well, sure. He's not drawn an honest breath in 70 years. (I make generous allowance for his method of language acquisition.)
Were US politics not in the throes of a debilitating systemic disease, someone like this could not have approached within a whiff of a nomination for high public office. They're like barbed spears; once they get in, they can't be removed without extensive - possibly fatal - tissue damage. Once the minions start comparing their leader to a god, look out. Just be grateful he doesn't have a horse...
Serpent
Resident Member
 
Posts: 3797
Joined: 24 Dec 2011


Re: Live Impeachment Hearings

Postby charon on December 19th, 2019, 9:20 pm 

I wish someone who didn't agree would answer! Or had something else to add.

So I say again - WHAT is the point of Trump being found wanting and being put through a charade whose outcome is

a) predictable, and

b) allows him to get away with it?

Has no one got anything better to do? Are we supposed to take it seriously?

Why isn't ANYONE saying what I'm saying? I haven't heard a single person anywhere say 'This is pointless'. Does anyone here know of such a person?

Don't say the papers say it. I know they do, but who is fundamentally questioning the whole system behind it?

Why don't they move to scrap it? It's not about justice or logic, it's about whoever has the majority vote. Which is insane when the defendant is accused of high crimes!

IS EVERYONE ASLEEP, OR WHAT?
charon
Active Member
 
Posts: 1956
Joined: 02 Mar 2011


Re: Live Impeachment Hearings

Postby TheVat on December 20th, 2019, 10:47 am 

Briefly (still on holiday travels): the political value, as it's seen by some Democrats, is that it means some Senators will hear strong evidence, refuse to consider its probative value, and decline to convict a corrupt and criminal official. Then, in 2020, they will face their own constituents at the polls. In states where margins are tight, it could make a difference if even 5% of them are asking "we saw high crimes and misdemeanors, why didn't you vote to convict?" that could flip a seat. In states where the Red Hat Cult base is solid and immune to facts, it won't. But Independent voters are 40% of the US electorate, and it's the more open-minded segment of that group that Democrats (and anyone who cares about constitutional democracy) are trying to awaken.

I agree with most of what you say about this clown show. The Senate, in its present form, makes a piss-poor jury. Any rational jury selection process would not have its pool consist of the most partisan political body possible.
User avatar
TheVat
Forum Administrator
 
Posts: 7271
Joined: 21 Jan 2014
Location: Black Hills


Re: Live Impeachment Hearings

Postby Serpent on December 20th, 2019, 11:48 am 

TheVat » December 20th, 2019, 9:47 am wrote: The Senate, in its present form, makes a piss-poor jury. Any rational jury selection process would not have its pool consist of the most partisan political body possible.

This is also a quite dramatic - terrifying - illustration of the efficacy of money in politics. The present state of the electoral system, as well as the senate is the direct result of machinations by a single faction - one that has the deepest and farthest reach, simply through its financial power: the buying of lobbies, electors, officials, districts and most notably, communications.

Any new country getting started right now, would well to take note:
Before even devising a government structure, establish a strong, independent news media.
Serpent
Resident Member
 
Posts: 3797
Joined: 24 Dec 2011


Re: Live Impeachment Hearings

Postby charon on December 20th, 2019, 7:25 pm 

...

What worries me is that apparently only ordinary, boring people like us can see the obvious.* You'd think it would all have been changed a long time ago. Purely as an act of intelligence.

* I'm not entirely serious.
charon
Active Member
 
Posts: 1956
Joined: 02 Mar 2011


Re: Live Impeachment Hearings

Postby Serpent on December 20th, 2019, 9:04 pm 

charon » December 20th, 2019, 6:25 pm wrote:...

You'd think it would all have been changed a long time ago. Purely as an act of intelligence.

No, intelligence doesn't figure into this - unless you mean in the sense of spy and saboteur networks.

Have you any idea how much effort and money has gone into creating this very situation? It took decades, careful placement of agents, subversion of processes, 'redistricting', ousting of opponents, repositioning of assets, bribery, blackmail, strategic event staging, public education initiatives, organizing spontaneous demonstrations... and, of course, buying and managing politicians at every level of government.
There is far too big an investment in corruption for the beneficiaries to tolerate any attempt at cleaning up.
Between 2007 and 2012, 200 of America’s most politically active corporations spent a combined $5.8 billion on federal lobbying and campaign contributions. A year-long analysis by the Sunlight Foundation suggests, however, that what they gave pales compared to what those same corporations got: $4.4 trillion in federal business and support.
https://sunlightfoundation.com/2014/11/17/fixed-fortunes-biggest-corporate-political-interests-spend-billions-get-trillions/
That's just five years on open political spending.
Then there is the [known] control of of broadcast media:
last year found that 37 percent of Americans say they frequently rely on local TV for news
https://www.vox.com/2018/4/3/17180020/sinclair-broadcast-group-conservative-trump-david-smith-local-news-tv-affiliate
plus the not so obvious means of influence: think tanks, advisory panels, research endowments, commercial advertising and the blessed internet.
If anybody brings down this regime, it will be its own supporters:
But the Koch network has shown an openness to supporting Democrats as it has slowly distanced itself from President Donald Trump and the GOP.

https://www.businessinsider.com/koch-brothers-rise-to-power-2019-1
Serpent
Resident Member
 
Posts: 3797
Joined: 24 Dec 2011


Re: Live Impeachment Hearings

Postby charon on December 21st, 2019, 9:34 am 

Serpent » December 21st, 2019, 2:04 am wrote:No, intelligence doesn't figure into this


All right, sanity then. Like going into a house with stuff all over the place and saying 'This is a complete mess' and cleaning it up. Call it what you will.

Figuring out how it got like that isn't the real issue. It can be done at some point but it's secondary. And once the place is all nice and clean it won't matter at all.

Too much nonsense is justified by saying it has its roots in history.
charon
Active Member
 
Posts: 1956
Joined: 02 Mar 2011


Re: Live Impeachment Hearings

Postby Serpent on December 21st, 2019, 11:54 am 

charon » December 21st, 2019, 8:34 am wrote:
Serpent » December 21st, 2019, 2:04 am wrote:No, intelligence doesn't figure into this

All right, sanity then.

We are talking about humans....no?
Figuring out how it got like that isn't the real issue.

You're right. How isn't the issue. Why is the issue. I thought i was clear on this point.
Too much nonsense is justified by saying it has its roots in history.

What I cited isn't roots (although systemic problems do come from the formative years) but real and present interests. If the most powerful interests are served by the status quo, those people are in a position to prevent any attempt to change things.
Therefore, governance will change if one of these conditions prevails:
1. The economic climate is affected by the present regime, such that it no longer suits those interests.
2. External events - global war, economic collapse, climate catastrophe, pandemic - render it impotent.
3. The internal stresses are exploited beyond the breaking point, precipitating civil war.
4. The whole structure is so riddled with dry-rot and termite damage that it disintegrates in.
5. The citizenry wakes from its post-hypnotic trance and starts demanding right action from its government.
- in that approximate order of probability.
Serpent
Resident Member
 
Posts: 3797
Joined: 24 Dec 2011


Re: Live Impeachment Hearings

Postby charon on December 21st, 2019, 3:12 pm 

We are talking about humans....no?


Definitely.

Why is the issue.


Why their thinking is so chaotic? Search me. Ego, self-importance... I don't know.
charon
Active Member
 
Posts: 1956
Joined: 02 Mar 2011


Next

Return to General News and Politics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests