dajoki
dajoki's JournalJohn Roberts comes face to face with the mess he made
John Roberts comes face to face with the mess he made
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/01/23/john-roberts-comes-face-face-with-mess-he-made/
There is justice in John Roberts being forced to preside silently over the impeachment trial of President Trump, hour after hour, day after tedious day.
<<snip>>
Robertss captivity is entirely fitting: He is forced to witness, with his own eyes, the mess he and his colleagues on the Supreme Court have made of the U.S. political system. As representatives of all three branches of government attend this unhappy family reunion, the living consequences of the Roberts Courts decisions, and their corrosive effect on democracy, are plain to see.
Ten years to the day before Trumps impeachment trial began, the Supreme Court released its Citizens United decision, plunging the country into the era of super PACs and unlimited, unregulated, secret campaign money from billionaires and foreign interests. Citizens United, and the resulting rise of the super PAC, led directly to this impeachment. The two Rudy Giuliani associates engaged in key abuses the ouster of the U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, the attempts to force Ukraines president to announce investigations into Trumps political opponents gained access to Trump by funneling money from a Ukrainian oligarch to the presidents super PAC.
The Roberts Courts decisions led to this moment in indirect ways, as well. The courts 2013 ruling in Shelby County gutted the Voting Rights Act and spurred a new wave of voter suppression. The decision in 2014?s McCutcheon further surrendered campaign finance to the wealthiest. The 2018 Janus decision hobbled the ability of labor unions to counter wealthy donors, while the 2019 Rucho ruling blessed partisan gerrymandering, expanding anti-democratic tendencies.
<<snip>>
Now, we are in a crisis of democratic legitimacy: A president who has plainly abused his office and broken the law, a legislature too paralyzed to do anything about it and a chief justice coming face to face with the system he broke.
Susan Collins Takes Hours to Decide on Lunch Before Ordering Exactly What Mitch McConnell Is Having
Susan Collins Takes Hours to Decide on Lunch Before Ordering Exactly What Mitch McConnell Is Having
https://www.newyorker.com/humor/borowitz-report/susan-collins-takes-hours-to-decide-on-lunch-before-ordering-exactly-what-mitch-mcconnell-is-having?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=onsite-share&utm_brand=the-new-yorker&utm_social-type=earned
WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report)On the first day of the impeachment trial in the United States Senate, Senator Susan Collins, a Republican of Maine, spent hours trying to decide what she would have for lunch before ultimately ordering exactly what Senator Mitch McConnell was having.
Clutching the Senate takeout menu in her hands, Collins told reporters mid-morning that the decision of what to have for lunch was a matter of serious consideration and that she wanted to review all of the available options before selecting one.
Im deeply troubled and concerned about getting this order right, Collins said. There are many valid choices on this menu and I dont want to give any of them short shrift.
Around 11 A.M., rumors swirled that Collins was leaning toward ordering a quinoa salad, a choice that would have set her apart from the rest of her Republican colleagues in the upper chamber.
By noon, however, Collins emerged from her office to tell reporters that she had ordered the exact same thing that the Senate Majority Leader had chosen, a roast beef sandwich on a roll.
At the end of the day, there was just not enough evidence that ordering anything else would have been better, she said.
According to sources, Collins spent the lunch hour eating her sandwich alone at her desk and trying to determine why everyone hates her.
When was the last time a Republican won a presidential election without the help of dirty tricks
Ronald Reagans October Surprise Plot Was Real After All
https://jacobinmag.com/2020/1/ronald-reagan-october-surprise-carter-iran-hostage-crisis-conspiracy
A batch of quietly released documents confirms what many have long suspected: Ronald Reagans 1980 presidential campaign worked behind the scenes to delay the release of US hostages in Iran, for the benefit of Reagans election campaign. It raises the question: When was the last time a Republican won a presidential election without the help of dirty tricks?
snip//
For those counting, thats now at least four of the last six Republican presidents who have won elections with the assistance of some sort of pre-election skulduggery, including Richard Nixons torpedoing of peace in Vietnam, the George W. Bush campaign shenanigans in Florida and the later use of the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, and Donald Trumps boost from Russias hacking of Democratic Party emails (even if that wasnt coordinated) not to mention the use of voter suppression that unites them all. And thats not counting George H. W. Bush getting help from John Majors government in the UK to beat Bill Clinton in 1992.
https://twitter.com/jacobinmag/status/1219938256411774978?s=19
https://twitter.com/jahewittindy/status/1220179033465458688?s=19
https://www.alternet.org/2017/07/gop-fraud-and-treason/amp/?__twitter_impression=true
Madam Speaker, I Rise in Support of Withholding the Articles
Madam Speaker, I Rise in Support of Withholding the Articles
https://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/277-75/60659-rsn-madam-speaker-i-rise-in-support-of-withholding-the-articles
Make no mistake, we are not impeaching this president. He is impeaching himself. If you are the president, and you obstruct justice, try to bribe a foreign leader, and threaten national security, youre going to get impeached. End of story.
Susan Davis, D-Calif., Impeachment Debate, House of Representatives, Wednesday, December 18, 2019.
The decision, Madam Speaker, to withhold the Articles of Impeachment is clearly justified by Abuse of Power. However, it is not the presidents abuse of power as articulated in the Articles of Impeachment, but rather Senator Mitch McConnells abuse of his power as
Senate Majority Leader that necessitates the course you have rightly undertaken.
Given Leader McConnells stark and clear declaration of intent to undermine the objectivity the Constitution envisions in an impeachment trial, you are compelled to safeguard the process by all means at your disposal.
Moreover, you are further empowered by the mandate of public opinion on the matter. By an overwhelming margin, the American people want precisely what you are negotiating for open, public testimony from administration officials with direct, firsthand knowledge of the events for which the president has been impeached. They are surely entitled to have it.
In addition, unfolding events accelerate the urgency. New evidence of the presidents involvement in the Ukrainian affair now surfaces on an almost daily basis. White House emails newly obtained by Kate Brannen at Just Security illustrate a clear intent on the part of the president personally to withhold Congressionally approved aid from Ukraine as the administration demanded an investigation into former vice president Joseph R. Biden.
<<snip>>
Bolton has let it be known that he will testify...But what gives him the right to dictate terms?
Why Arent All the Presidents Men Testifying?
Their contempt for Congress should be met with a legal and political fusillade.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/07/opinion/trump-impeachment-congress.html?
Why arent all the presidents men testifying?
Some of the presidents closest aides, official and unofficial, past and present Robert Blair, Michael Duffey, Rudy Giuliani, Don McGahn, Mick Mulvaney and Mike Pompeo invoke a presidential order to refuse to give evidence about delays in Ukraine aid. But government officials like Gordon Sondland, William Taylor, Alexander Vindman and Marie Yovanovitch all ignored such orders and gave valuable testimony. After weeks of tweeting, giving interviews and writing his memoirs, John Bolton has let it be known that he will testify before the Senate, if he is subpoenaed by the Senate. But what gives him the right to dictate terms?
Mr. Boltons statement Monday claims that he is trying to resolve the serious competing issues between his obligations as a citizen and a former national security official. In fact, those obligations point in the same direction. Like jury duty or paying taxes, testifying under oath about facts we know is not optional; it is a fundamental obligation of citizenship. As a government official, Mr. Bolton held high office under an oath to support and defend the Constitution. Testifying at a Senate impeachment trial fulfills that constitutional oath.
Anyone who served in high public office knows that testifying before Congress about matters you worked on in government is part of your solemn public duty. If legislators questions impinge upon legitimate concerns about executive or national security privilege, you still must appear, declining to answer only those questions that call for information legally protected from public disclosure.
It does not matter that these witnesses have successfully withheld their testimony until now. The Houses impeachment vote should overrule any ethical or legal objection these witnesses now have to testifying before the Senate. How can senators vote on Mr. Trumps removal without the testimony of any of his closest advisers? And if Mr. Bolton ends up testifying, dont the Senate and the public need the others testimony to flesh out the full story?
<<snip>>
Profile Information
Gender: MaleHome country: USA
Current location: PA
Member since: Wed May 11, 2005, 10:48 PM
Number of posts: 10,678