So Now We Know

[NanceGreggs]

In the midst of all of the ongoing investigations into Trump & Co, at least there is one issue that requires no investigation whatsoever: exactly how low the Republicans were willing to sink in order to protect the Traitor-in-Chief they nominated, supported, and ultimately elected.

They ignored his pussy-grabbing remarks while insisting he is a good, moral Christian. They ignored his inane, incoherent “tweets” while maintaining he was intellectually brilliant. His never-ending string of lies were dismissed as misspeaks or harmless exaggerations.

His bigotry, racism, misogyny, and the inciting/encouraging of violence – all of it was okay with the GOP. His appointment of totally incompetent people to Cabinet positions was cast as “his own unique style of governing”. His ignorance of the simplest operations of our government’s workings was passed-off as political naivete because he was “new to the job”.

When Trump started charging the taxpayers millions of dollars to fund his weekly golf trips, his children’s business excursions, and protecting his wife and son (who refuse to live with him), the Republicans looked the other way.

When Trump accused Barack Obama – AND our British allies – of engaging in criminal activity in order to spy on him, the GOP sat silent.

Despite the overwhelming evidence that Trump and his cohorts were colluding with the Russians during his campaign and his “presidency”, the Republicans dismissed such evidence as being of no consequence.

EVEN WHEN Trump invited the very Russians he was allegedly colluding with to a closed-door meeting in the Oval Office where he admittedly disclosed highly classified information to our sworn enemies, the Republicans defended it as well, he IS the president, so he’s allowed to do that – the consequences be damned.

And now it’s over. The mounting evidence against Trump & Co can no longer be ignored, dismissed, denied.

Where does this leave the GOP? In lifeboats – frantically rowing away from the sinking ship, hoping against hope that no one will remember how enthusiastically they supported and defended Putin’s Puppet from day one.

But we, as a nation, WILL remember. As the Traitor-in-Chief and his GOP-cohorts go down, and go down hard, we WILL remember how the Republicans made excuses for and defended his behaviour, no matter how bizarre. We WILL remember how they supported an illiterate, bloviating, mentally-unhinged liar who they knew all along was unfit for office. We WILL remember the party that was more than willing to throw their fellow citizens and their country under the bus for the sake of chalking-up a “political win”.

The fact is that no matter how fast those GOP-laden lifeboats are propelled away from the sinking ship, we all know – without any doubt or uncertainty – which party was more than anxious to tell their fellow passengers to stand their ground on deck, because the ship was unsinkable.

Now is the time to watch for Republicans boarding lifeboats – claiming they were never really on that sinking ship to begin with. They just happened to be found mid-ocean, feverishly rowing like galley slaves, because they just noticed the iceberg that they insisted was never there.

[Hekate]

1. Kick and popcorn

[CentralMass]

2. K&R

However, why is Nancy Pelosi premptively taking impeachment off the table again ? Does she like hearing herself say the words ?

[NanceGreggs]

7. Maybe it'[s because she enjoys ...

... hearing people put words in her mouth. Like you just did.

[sheshe2]

10. Well done.

[CentralMass]

22. Point taken. I based my opinion on a post that I read here. However..

However i did just look up the actual CNN video from the town hall where she made her statement.

http://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2017/05/16/nancy-pelosi-town-hall-donald-trump-impeachment-sot.cnn

Listening to her actual words does not nake me feel sny better. She is being conciliatory.

She finished off her stayement with a comment tbat this is "supposed to be a honeymoon period"

I would think that given what she and other members of congress must know about this that she would have given a more agressive statement on the matter.

She is the House Minority Leader and I did not get any sense of the gravity of the situation from her words.

[Honeycombe8]

36. I think her response is more appropriate than an "impeach him" response.

I WANT the politicians to seek facts, gather evidence, and approach the matters in a legal, non-partisan way. It won't do any good to push for this or that, because then it WILL seem like a witch hunt. At least, for the Democratic Party leaders. They should be above the fray, IMO. A dignified demeanor, calm reasoned responses, but still pointing out "facts" as they are leaked.

It looks like the facts are there, and the behavior of Trump and others certainly is guilty. Esp obstruction of justice.

If it turns out that crimes can't be proven, then it will look like the Democrats were pounding the table for "impeachment! impeachment!" because they lost the election, and not because of facts and protection of the country and the democracy.

If the facts are there, Dems don't NEED to pound the table. Speak about the substance of the leaks, of course. Point out this and that, which indicate guilt, if the leaks gave us that information. If questioned about impeachment, say something noncommital like "Let's see where the facts take us, first." or "IF the facts lead to collusion or other crimes, then that would be grounds for impeachment, but let's wait to see what the Special Counsel's findings are."

I think that places it squarely in the hands of the Special Counsel, and takes away Trump's claims that this is revenge by the Dems because they lost. They don't need to wear halos and be unrealistically unconcerned, but they don't need to become a cheerleading section on the impeachment side....yet.

Now IF the facts lead to a crime or crimes by Trump, and if impeachment papers aren't filed or Trump doesn't resign, THEN it's time to pound the table, IMO.

[CentralMass]

41. I see that point but I don't see why the House Minority Leader would not use that

Opportunity to lay some heat on Trump rather then making the argument that impeachment is not warranted. Drop the impeachment topic and get some hard hits in with the air time.

[NastyRiffraff]

66. You keep saying "I see that point BUT....."

then go on about how you don't "see that point." Enough. If you dislike Nancy Pelosi, fine. But don't keep insisting you are being conciliatory, when you're clearly not.

[George II]

71. She never said that impeachment is not warranted.

Here is the full transcript:

http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1705/15/se.01.html

[Chemisse]

43. Exactly right.

The system is at work now. It's time to back off a bit and let the collapse proceed. Cheering it on would only further politicize what will someday be an impeachment vote.

[GreenEyedLefty]

47. Or maybe she's smart enough to see that it is much more likely DFT will resign

... rather than be impeached and removed from office.

[emulatorloo]

64. The post that formed your opinion is one of the most dishonest posts I've seen on DU

The spin from that post seems to be still inadvertently coloring your viewpoint.

[Cha]

79. Agree.. who can forget that rubbish.

[sheshe2]

11. That is not what she said at the town hall.

Did you watch it? I did.

NOT WHAT SHE SAID!

[retrowire]

14. What did she say? Nt

[sheshe2]

17. Here

[retrowire]

18. Damn it I can't watch videos right now

I should've expected that. Can I get a summary?

[sheshe2]

27. she said we need all the facts before we move...

if you can't watch the vid....which was awesome, btw...then I don't have time to look for the text. it is late and I gotta go.

What is this????

"I should've expected that."

Why the snark? I do not understand why are doing this to me. I gave you the vid.

[retrowire]

49. I didn't intend that in a snarky way, I apologize!

I meant it like, "silly me, of course someone is going to do the courtesy of giving me the video itself without knowing I can't watch them, I should've been more specific"

My bad, not yours, I mean that. I thank you!

[sheshe2]

59. Okay

Thanks have a good day.

[retrowire]

61. You too sheshe! Nt

[George II]

70. The transcript is here:

http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1705/15/se.01.html

CUOMO: But what do you say about the practical effect of some of your members -- let's say, mostly recently Al Green, OK -- said this is time for impeachment. That word is getting thrown around.

PELOSI: Yeah.

CUOMO: Do you say to your members of your party, "slow down"? Because that is not a way to bridge any kind of divide with the Republicans.

PELOSI: No. But it's what they -- it's a reflection of what they're hearing in their own constituencies. But it's not -- you know, it -- we've been -- some of that has picked up this past week. We've been out of session. I'll see them tomorrow when I come back, but -- they come back. But they know I don't subscribe to that.

You know, in other words, again, if you're talking about impeachment, you're talking about, what are the facts? Not I don't like him and I don't like his hair and -- you know, I think, what are the facts? I don't like what he said about this. What are the facts that you would make a case on? What are the rules that he may have violated? If you don't have that case, you're just participating in more hearsay.

And that's not the basis of -- and we owe the American people the -- I mean, just some stability in all of this. This is the time where he is supposed to be having his honeymoon. What a marriage. The honeymoon -- the honeymoon of -- so we watch and see what he's going to do, what is his vision, how is he going to implement it, and the rest. And it's been sloppy.


Edit, for some reason the bold function isn't working - here are the sentences I tried to highlight:

if you're talking about impeachment, you're talking about, what are the facts?
I think, what are the facts?
What are the facts that you would make a case on?
What are the rules that he may have violated?

So basically she's saying that we need all the facts in order to build a case, we can't just throw out "impeach him" if you can't fully document the reasons. Otherwise the impeachment would fail.

[Control-Z]

16. Please read more than just the headline or subject line.

Even here on DU. And make a point of discerning opinion from fact.

Nancy Pelosi is one of the strongest Democrats we have. I hope to see her back as Speaker one day. She knows how to run her house whether minority or majority. You'll never see her call a vote without the numbers. She always knows what she is doing.

[CentralMass]

25. If that was meant for me, please see my reply "above::

[George II]

69. For about the 100th time since the town hall, SHE DID NOT TAKE IMPEACHMENT OFF THE TABLE....

...if she did, why tell us where/when she did, in context. In other words not just part of what she said in its entirety, not just an incomplete excerpt like others have done.

Thank you.

[Lotusflower70]

76. I don't blame her

As obvious as it may look, it still has to play out. And she certainly doesn't want to say anything to jeopardize the possibility. And I still say possibility because if they fought this hard to get this buffoon into office, they will continue to fight to keep him there.

[chillfactor]

3. Excellent post....

I so enjoy reading your posts....you put things so succinctly.....which I could never do.

[Dawson Leery]

4. kick

[yortsed snacilbuper]

5. k$R

[eleny]

6. The disgusting thing is that they know how gerrymandering could save them despite everything

[Cha]

8. Thank you, Nance

[MFM008]

9. What you said

X1000.

[sheshe2]

12. WE.

WE.

WE are the unsinkable Molly Brown. Don't fuck with us.

[Doreen]

13. Yes, our nation and the world will remember it just as Germany and most of the world

remember their mistake of Hitler. The U.S having helped the Germans with their mistake are shaking their heads that we forgot theirs and did not learn. We had to go out and do it ourselves to actually get it.

[triron]

15. Plausible scenario.

[ProudProgressiveNow]

19. K&R nt

[MLAA]

20. Well done, as usual 😄

Thanks, an excellent summary of the nightmare that repugs will have to own. Hopefully it will become their collective obituary.

[Greybnk48]

21. Excellent! Thank you Nance. n/t

[Iggo]

23. Kick.

[Jopin Klobe]

24. Always check ...

... Argentina first ...

[pink]

26. I've missed your posts

I've been away from DU for a few years and was so pleased to see your name when I scanned through the posts. You always seem to reflect just what I am thinking. One thing though, you forgot to mention the nepotism.

Living in Australia, we had our own problems when we had to deal with PM Tony Abbott. He couldn't string 2 words together and was totally clueless and an embarrassment to the country. Probably he wasn't quite as bad as the Trumpster, and as you may know, we find it easier to change governments and leaders than you do.

I find I'm glued to the tv screen watching CNN at all times and have a good supply of popcorn. I'm really looking forward to when he steps off the plane for the first leg of his tour.

[grantcart]

28. except most of the Republicans are too dumb rock stupid

to understand they are talking on water and aren't looking for life boats.

When they do start looking they are going to be looking for Josh's Arc.

[appleannie1943]

29. Can I copy and share that on facebook? I would say it was borrowed.

[NanceGreggs]

30. Of course.

[sheshe2]

33. You are a very good person.

[Gothmog]

81. I love Nance's posts

[sheshe2]

82. Hi, Gothmog.

I do to.

[Gothmog]

83. I am typing one handed

[sheshe2]

84. I know...

I hope you are feeling better.

[spanone]

31. K&R... 😎👍🏼

[jberryhill]

32. To be fair...

The Titanic struck the iceberg at around 11:40 PM, and its last radio message was not until after 2 AM.


It was perfectly safe aboard the Titanic for several hours, so the statements were accurate at the time.

[NanceGreggs]

35. To be fair ...

... the GOP knew their chosen "captain of the ship" was a lying, incompetent SOB when they elected him. And yet they encouraged their fellow passengers to get on-board anyway, knowing that iceberg was out there.

They just figured they could get to the lifeboats before the below-deck riff-raff realized they wouldn't survive.

[jberryhill]

37. This assumes you believe the official story about the iceberg

There are a lot of questions about that.

For one thing, the hull of the ship was made of steel. Icebergs are made of ice. Ice is not hard enough to cut steel. It doesn't matter how cold it is. It is a basic principle of material science that you cannot cut steel with a piece of ice.

In fact, it was not until the wreck was discovered recently that it was found the entire vessel had snapped into two pieces.

So, even if you believe the official "iceberg" theory, and even if you ignore basic material science, there is no way that an iceberg cut the entire ship into pieces.

There had to be hidden explosives aboard the ship.

So we don't really know why the Titanic sank. There's a lot of scientific controversy about that. It could have been some 400 pound guy in his bunk.

Oh, and, Benghazi, emails, Clinton's penis, Anthony's Weiner, Kenya!

[yardwork]

53. I can't tell if you're joking, but if you're serious, this is incorrect.

A heavy enough piece of ice colliding with a large ship can result in enough pressure to damage the skin of the ship. It's not a matter of "ice cuts steel."

It's a function of momentum and friction.

Think of a speeding car colliding with a bank of snow and ice. The snow can't "cut steel" but if the car is going fast enough and the pile of snow is big enough, the collision will result in mangled broken steel. Same when a car hits a tree. Wood "can't cut steel" but a car hitting a tree is going to be damaged.

The Titanic probably broke apart when it hit the sea floor.

[jberryhill]

55. Umm....

No, there is a grainy over-enlarged YouTube video with a creepy soundtrack which clearly shows there was no iceberg. None of the survivors reported seeing an iceberg.

There are always going to be people whose reality is going to reflect what they are disposed to believe.

[bucolic_frolic]

56. There are plenty of conspiracy theories surrounding the Titanic's sinking

Opponents of the proposed Federal Reserve system were scuttled in the tragedy, say some authors

JP Morgan cancelled his imminent passage hours before the ship sailed, they say

Please enjoy the finest theories

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RMS_Titanic_alternative_theories

[jberryhill]

57. As there will be when the SS Tyrannic goes down

[bucolic_frolic]

60. LOL Good play!

[csziggy]

62. A new study indicates that a coal fire may have weakened the steel

Of not only the Titanic hull but also of the bulkheads that were supposed to make it unsinkable. The researchers found firemen from the ship that testified in American inquiries that the coal was on fire before the ship was launched and that the fire was never put out - the British investigation of the time did not hear from the firemen since the White Line claimed that all the firemen had died on the ship.

The heat was great enough to transfer the bulkhead and light the coal in the neighboring bunker. It also buckled the steel and a fireman testified that he saw the bulkhead breach where it had buckled. If an interior bulkhead could breach from the pressure, so could the exterior hull.

They also have a theory that the fire is the reason the Titanic did not slow for the iceberg field - the only way to put out the fire was to remove the coal and the only place to move the coal was into the boilers. By the time they reached the area where ice had been spotted, they did not have enough coal left to slow for the ice field and still make it to port.

I've seen the documentary as shown on Smithsonian Channel and it is persuasive.

A Coal Fire May Have Helped Sink the ‘Titanic’
A new documentary claims the Titanic’s hull was weakened before it struck an iceberg

By Danny Lewis
smithsonian.com
January 5, 2017

The sinking of the Titanic has long been a cautionary tale about the dangers of hubris. But after more than a century, a new documentary offers evidence that the iceberg wasn’t the only reason for the sinking of the “unsinkable ship.” Instead, the floating mountain of ice may have happened to strike the exact spot where the hull had been weakened by a coal fire blazing in the bowels of the passenger ship.

In "Titanic: The New Evidence," which airs on the Smithsonian Channel on January 21, Irish journalist Senan Molony argues that the hull of the infamous ship was compromised weeks before it set sail. Through researching photos and eyewitness testimony from the time, Molony contends that a fire spontaneously lit inside one of the Titanic’s enormous coal bunkers and critically weakened a crucial segment of the ship’s hull.

"The ship is a single-skin ship," Molony tells Smithsonian.com. By that he means that while modern ships contain two hulls, at the time, the Titanic, like most ships of its day, just had the one. Because the bunkers where the crew stored coal for the engines sat right next to the hull, the heat from the fire would have transferred directly to the skin, damaging the Titanic's structure.

For Molony, who has spent decades studying the Titanic, the "smoking gun" came in a recent discovery of a trove of photographs documenting the ship’s construction and preparations for its maiden voyage. The photos had been taken by the engineering chief of Harland and Wolff, the Belfast-based company that built the doomed vessel. About four years ago, Molony and a collaborator purchased the photographs from a descendant of the company’s director, who had found them stored in an attic. As they pored over the images, Molony was shocked to see a 30-foot-long black streak documented on the outside of the Titanic’s hull, close to where the iceberg struck its starboard side.

“We asked some naval architects what this could be, and nobody knew and everybody was intrigued,” Molony says. “The best suggestion at the time was that this was a reflection." But Monology disagrees because, at the time the photograph was taken, he says, there was no road or dock on the shore which could have been reflected on the hull.

Read more: http://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/coal-fire-may-have-helped-sink-titanic-180961699/#owrUZmeiqQtYS3Tu.99

[GreenEyedLefty]

48. What ultimately killed 1500 people the night the Titanic sank was hubris.

The ASSumed the ship was unsinkable so they provided far fewer lifeboats than needed for the number of passengers... and they ASSumed the ship was unsinkable, even after it was listing badly in the water.

And let's not forget - and this is kind of important - that the majority of the people who died were 2nd and 3rd class passengers.

[oldtime dfl_er]

34. well put

I think the GOP should be barred from holding any office for the next 50 years. They are ALL complicit, down to and including John McCain.

[calimary]

38. Another great one, Nance!

[BigBearJohn]

39. That about sums it up. Thanks.

[dalton99a]

40. Kick.

[Ilsa]

42. We start by electing Jon Ossoff and other Ds, ASAP. Thank you, NG. nt

[Cha]

80. I HOpe So.. we need that Win.. we Need

Jon Ossoff!

[Chemisse]

44. This is excellent - very well expressed.

I am daydreaming of all the political ads that can be made, once the 45 regime collapse is complete.

Every public utterance of support for Trump can be coupled with equally public examples of Trump's instability, idiocy and corruption-to-the-core. They can never claim they were fooled by him. It was obvious all along how bad a Trump presidency would be, and there is ample evidence of that every step of the way.

[Barack_America]

45. Will we remember?

Democrats certainly will. But I've yet to see much evidence this will harm the Republican brand long term. It's an opportunity for Dems to pick up some voters, but they still need to make their case, and there's seemingly not even enough oxygen left in the room that they dare speak.

I don't think they've done anything wrong, why detract attention from what Trump is doing to himself? But, if they wish to capitalize on this, they will need to find their opportunity to ensure as much Republican trash as possible is thrown on that fire. The trash still does not dispose of itself, and plenty still manage to find a treasure within it, sadly.

[brer cat]

46. K&R

[raccoon]

50. Great post. nt

[gademocrat7]

51. K&R!

[The Wizard]

52. Another excellent missive

from my favorite DU contributor. It makes a great case for crucifixion of GOP leadership.

[bucolic_frolic]

54. They are stealing our private and social equity and enslaving us to lenders

Commons, monuments, parks - gone or under assault
Schools, highways, buildings - privatized with taxpayers paying the new owners
Social Security - under attempted reduction or privatization schemes
Medicare - attempts to voucherize
Medicaid - reduced and attempts to voucherize
Annuities, pensions - fiduciary due diligence doesn't matter
Are our banks safe? Insurance?

We must work to reverse all that they do to the extent it can be reversed

We must never forget, and never forgive

His programs are the dumbest in history. Brings the jobs back from China. What
does that mean? move the factories? Why would the owners sell them? It takes
MONEY to move factories, and factories needs workers at $1 an hour. Here?

Drill for oil and gas. The world is awash in cheap energy. Solar and wind are producing
67% of California's electricity! Tesla can't make electric cars fast enough.

Money belongs to investment and government/industry research. Innovation leads to
good jobs. In the past - record players, stereo, video, digital, computer, microchips -
it took investment policy to innovate. What do we do? Drill for natural gas and oil.
There is no growth in that future. None.

[NurseJackie]

58. Thank you.

[BumRushDaShow]

63. Keepin' it kicked!

And Rec!

[emulatorloo]

65. K&R

[smirkymonkey]

67. K&R

[NastyRiffraff]

68. Another K&R!

Funny how this thread devolved into Titanic conspiracy "theories." But well done as usual Nance!

[Mountain Mule]

72. Most Excellent!

Thank you!

[joet67]

73. The most delicious irony is that this all happened

under the Make America Great Again mantle- the fully own this, all three branches of government. I suspect some seat in 18 will be up for grabs...And when I say some, I mean quite a few.

Great post!

[northoftheborder]

74. Kick and save

[Gothmog]

75. K&R

[BlancheSplanchnik]

77. I still occasionally run into people carping about "all politicians are awful,

Two sides of the same coin, the both do it...", etc.

I may print this out to use for face slapping.

[mcar]

78. K&R