Remind you of anyone? Let’s not forget that many of Trump’s supporters wanted him to use the military to introduce martial law.
If Trump ever holds public office again I shall be frankly stunned.
What’s to stop him? The republican senators have already said they won’t vote to convict him, and without a conviction it’s perfectly legal for him to run again. He’s stockpiled millions in campaign funds by lying to his supporters and saying he needed money to “stop the steal”, and he has a huge, cult like following to whom he can do no wrong and who he’s convinced their vote was stolen. He really didn’t seem to like the job of president very much and shirked it as much as he could, but he sure liked the power and fawning adulation. Maybe the actual work the job of being president takes will be enough to discourage him. One can only hope.
Well core republican support has been significantly affected by Jan 6th insurrection at the Capitol, and the disgusting views of people like Marjorie Taylor Greene being kept in the public mindset.
Whether the fallout will be enough, or last 4 years is another matter, but key Republicans are rightly worried.
Well it was significantly not enough this time, and quite a few have changed their allegiance after his seditious attempts to overturn a legal election. As I say time will tell.
His impeachment might not be the end of it, he may yet face civil charges that could be the coup de grâce.
I doubt it, he was pretty lazy on that front, by all objective comparisons.
Priceless - especially since she wore her “free speech” mask 
At least she’s off the Education committee. Fuck she’s an idiot. Couldn’t think straight if the line was drawn in front of her.
Edited to add: also “ McCarthy said Greene’s past opinions “do not represent the views of my party.” But without naming the offenders, he said Pelosi hadn’t stripped committee memberships from Democrats who became embroiled in controversy.“
IMO - both parties need to clean up their act as to what “represents” them. I don’t understand why they stay apart of the “party” instead of being booted and back-benched as “independents”.
Welcome to the birth is a new political party. What was once the GOP is now the GOPQ.
1 Like
“…a bunch of morons Democrats…”
“addicting our nation to hate…”
How don’t they see it?
1 Like
I don’t understand why she can’t get ousted completely. What other job in this world wouldn’t fire you if you tweeted your colleague should be executed and posted a picture of yourself with an AR 15 rifle next to a picture of your coworkers while bragging that you’re their worse nightmare? We have lower standards for congress than we do for fast food workers.
3 Likes
She got elected in. Her area. She represents them. Now, the Republicans say “that’s not us” BUT it is, she’s under the Republican ticket.
IMO- can’t have it both ways.
She got her “job” via electors. BUT why not as an “independent” if she doesn’t fit or represent Republican.
I can’t even find how they’d go about expelling someone from a political party. It might be harder than expelling an elected member of congress, at least there are hard an fast rules, like requiring a two thirds vote for expulsion. They could encourage her to leave the party of course, but she’s very tied to Trump and his supporters. The last thing the GOP wants is for Trump supporters to go off and form their own party, they would lose a big segment of voters. It will be interesting to see what Trump does when he no longer needs the GOP’s support during the impeachment.
She was legally elected to congress, I know it’s ridiculous, but as repugnant as I find her views, removing a legally elected opponent, because you don’t like the views they express, that is undemocratic, and a slippery slope.
I’ve said it before on here, but it warrants repeating, that hearing views I sometimes find repugnant is the price of democracy, and of freedom of speech and expression.
Be weary of any government or politician who tries to suppress the opinions of others, whether it’s by violence, through the legal system, or by shouting rhetoric like "fake news at them repeatedly, without addressing what they actually say.
The best challenge to a bad idea, is a better idea, or simply to expose WHY it is bad.
At least we can all now hear what Marjorie Taylor Greene is saying, better that than she is making nefarious plans, out of sight, and under the public’s radar. I suspect the GOP leadership know this as well.
I apologise if this is gibberish, but yimminy I’m drunk…
Congrats to Scotland fans on their historic rugby win. Now come on Wales, you can do this tomorrow…
Perhaps because her supporters tend to be registered Republicans?
Trump’s property dealings under investigation.
"Manhattan prosecutors probing Trump’s real-estate business for possible insurance and tax fraud have stepped up witness interviews in recent months and hired forensic accountants, "
It never rains etc…
This is my point. In Canada (every country has its own approaches, and sharing these ideas, are just sharing) a Liberal or Conservative may run under that - and may be voted in by voters of that party (or policies) - BUT staying under that “Party” once the candidate demonstrates they are NOT of the same “political mindset”, does not guarantee they remain a Party Member.
If the voters thought they were voting a certain Party Candidate, and that Politician (representative) loses their Party Status, they stay as the representative as an Independent,
until the next election 
. The district can decide then if that person truly represents them.
They don’t “lie” to themselves or their policy “lines”. Not every POV or conspiraturd is acceptable as “representing” a Party view.
1 Like
Last night I saw a fascinating Youtube clip about Mar a Lago.
Built in 1924-27 by Marjorie Merriweather Post, a cereal heiress. It’s pretty tacky from the outside.
The clip showed a lot of the interior. The combined level of ostentation and vulgarity has to be seen to be believed. I can understand why Donald likes it.
Trump bought Mar a Lago in 1985 for around $US10 million. Current value is around $US100 million.
Looks like he changed it enough to avoid copyright dispute.
My family’s coat of arms features a black man chained to an oak tree. Truly.
I guess I could have wild guess at the foundation of family’s wealth (which may have been once) 
Nope, he flat-out stole it. The family he stole it from considered legal action in stopping Trump, but they understood Trump’s methods, and any court case would be one of a long drawn out battle of stalling and delay.
Speaking of Trump’s legal methods, have you gotten a load of his latest impeachment trial lawyers? Them and Giuliani most be riding around in the same clown car. His previous lawyers, who looked fairly competent, quit over what is speculated to be strategy and/or payment. He won’t take his lawyers advice, has no problem with throwing them under the bus, and regularly stiffs them of payment. It seems he may be having trouble finding good lawyers under those conditions. Big surprise. I don’t suppose it matters, the GOP senators have already said they won’t convict him. Some street mime could represent him and it would turn out the same.
2 Likes
One of his lawyers sued him a while ago. I laughed like fuck when I read that. Sued him for ‘repeated claims’ mail voting is ripe with fraud. You have to see the hilarity in that.
1 Like
Not being an American, I can only comment that as an observer, having the impeachment move to the Senate is a positive step.
On a world scale, it will restore some credibility “back” when it comes to a Democratic Voting process and attempted Coups. I still shake my head at the approach of tRump and his gang of followers 
(idiots).
History will have the Republicans (because of the party support) on the “wrong” side of this - internet chatter, documents, court transcripts, tRumps own words, the religious evangelical encouragement of revolution … all captured.
AND from the bits I peek at on the “chatter” which are fairly moderate (stupid and unevidenced conjecture) the attention isn’t on the Impeachment Trial (look away, hide your eyes and cover your ears)… it is on excuses and “equivalency fallacies”.
If logic, reason, and evidence “makes” a person “liberal” (hahahahaha) - then the magical-thinking have nothing to worry about…