Look, the focus on personality, character, integrity, behaviour, whatever, is completely trivial. It destroys any attempt to understand why the world is as it is in terms of interests, relations of power, history, economics, and so on - points at which one might actually intervene to make a difference i.e. engage in politics and attempt to excercise agency. — StreetlightX

This is a complete non-sequitur. Why would caring about the character of the people you entrust with power destroy your ability to engage in politics? Putting the right people in power is part of politics.

This is why I asked whether or not you are in favor of some system of complete direct democracy, because otherwise your insistence that who is in power doesn't matter makes zero sense.

The focus on charcater or whatever psychological bullshit is effectively an argument for political impotence and mystification - it says: don't look at the world and try to understand and alter it, just put it down to some ineffable internal psychology. — StreetlightX

That's just nonsense. I have no idea where you get that from, certainly not from anything I wrote.

And once this happens all anyone can talk about is useless shit like affections and feelings: embarrasment, laughter, shame, whatever. — StreetlightX

Again, I don't see how this follows. Perhaps you could make a structured argument for all these claims.

The only thing worse than a Trump supporter is a Trump opponent whose political literacy extends as far as 'this is not normal'. They ought to be first against the wall when the shit hits the fan. At least Trump supporters have a keener instinct for things that actually matter. — StreetlightX

And that just looks to me like an ad-hominem.

You sidestepped my points: 1) It is inadequate as a sole basis to impeach, but -like any credible whistleblower report- it warrants investigating further. 2) it ia hypocrytical to suggest Biden should be investigated based solely on circumstances, while claiming investigating a whistleblower report is a "witch hunt."

The complaint is inadequate for investigation is what I meant, and for the reasons I stated.

No, it’s not. — NOS4A2

This has nothing to do with vegetarianism; you'd like to trivialize my description of what the two have in common, but your comment is irrelevant to my argument.

Your stated reason is contrary to whistleblower law: 2nd hand information is reportable. The report was even judged credible by the IG.

I'm still awaiting a comment regarding the obvious hypocrisy: there was no evidence of a crime by Biden, so are you decrying that investigation as well? Do you agree with Miller that we have a "right to know" about Biden? If so, we why do we not have the right to know about Trump?

Whistleblower law? Which law would that be?

Hearsay is generally inadmissible for a variety of reasons, and those reasons apply to this hearsay.

I think this is meant for another member...

Hearsay is generally inadmissible for a variety of reasons, and those reasons apply to this hearsay. — NOS4A2

Apparently not true.
https://abovethelaw.com/2019/09/trump-impeachment-hearsay/

:up: There's nothing more disempowering than moral outrage.

Oh I think the passive acceptance that this is just the way Trump is, is far worse than moral outrage. The only downside with my moral outrage is that it won't effect change - I'm not an American elector or influencer in this topic, I only come here to sound off about it, which I will have to stop doing. But Trump is literally destroying American politics before our eyes and being outraged about it is a sign of sanity.

I'd compare it to a hostage situation, no?

Oh I think the passive acceptance that this is just the way Trump is, is far worse than moral outrage. — Wayfarer

But "how Trump is" is not the problem; what he (really the GOP) is doing is the problem. And as @StreetlightX pointed out focusing on how Trump is distracts form seeing what is being done (not just by Him but in His name!) and trying to counteract it.

I'm hoping and also confident we're seeing the last days of Trump. All that it will take is a few key players in GOP to realise they can ditch him - it's a real emperor's new clothes story. I don't see how it is remotely conceivable that Trump could run for re-election even if impeached then acquitted by the Senate. He's damaged goods.

Trump distracts from seeing.... — Janus

Totally disagree with SLX on this but am choosing not to argue. The most spineless, gutless and reprehensible thing is that the GOP has allowed themselves to be f****ed over by this man and still don't have the guts to stand up against it.

Anyway - I will restrict my input here to what I see as newsworthy developments.

The most spineless, gutless and reprehensible thing is that the GOP has allowed themselves to be f****ed over by this man and still don't have the guts to stand up against it. — Wayfarer

Obviously it suits their purposes very nicely. With all the focus on Trump's antics they can get away with murder. That's what's really going on in my view.

Are you "choosing not to argue" or are you having trouble finding arguments?

Are you "choosing not to argue" or are you having trouble finding arguments? — Janus

The former. I've made my views clear on this matter.

With all the focus on Trump's antics they can get away with murder. — Janus

What exactly does Trump uniquely allow them to get away with? Something that they couldn’t get away with when Bush was in office, for example.

Consider instead the roughly 85 various policy rollbacks on environmental protections undertaken by his administration so far, including the clean water protections just under a month ago. Consider instead the appointment of the roughly 150 lifetime tenure judges that will transform the US judiciary in unfathomable ways. Or consider the relaxation of the Johnston amendments that enabled Churches to play far bigger roles in political life than they could before. Or the relaxation of the Dodd-Frank regulations put in place to stop another financial crisis. Or the concentration camps. And a thousand other things. — StreetlightX

Not saying none of this would have been implemented without the focus being on Trump, his pussy-grabbing, his constant lies, the Mueller report, the Russians, collusion, etc., etc.; with most of the outrage being focused on Trump, other things that seem comparatively insignificant may be slipped in under the radar.

Can't help myself. :sad:

So, as we all know, Trump constantly rails against the 'fake media' in which he lumps NY Times, Washington Post, CNN, and many other mainstream media outlets.

And one of the consequences is that he implicitly trusts the Alt-Right media, like Brietbart, Fox (the commentators, not the news team) and god knows what other third-rate internet yellow press.

So they're the ones who are cooking up and circulating all this bullshit conspiracy theory about Clinton's email server being in Ukraine. And Trump just falls for it, hook line and sinker. He just KNOWS that this is what was REALLY behind the whole Mueller thing. Knows it. And he's infuriated because (1) people don't believe him and (2) he can't find the definitive proof. So he's got this massive workforce, including the Secretary of State and the Attorney General, and Rudy "Batshit Crazy" Giuliani, enrolled in trying to find the evidence of the scam that he KNOWS led to the Mueller enquiry. He thinks Alexander Downer, Australian diplomat in London, was in on it! And the FBI! And the CIA! It's tinfoil hat stuff.

This is what is going to bring him down, as it's all based on lies, and he can't bullshit his way out of it.

https://nyti.ms/2AFJ3Un

If Trump is impeached then Mike Pence will assume his office. Is he accusing the Vice President of a clandestine attempt to usurp the presidency?! Oh wait, I forgot that when your supporters have a keen instinct for what’s important you don’t need to make sense.

Not saying none of this would have been implemented without the focus being on Trump — Janus

So you got nothing, in other words.

No, I'm saying it is likely that not all, but some, of this would not have gotten through without the distraction Trump has provided. Obviously I cannot state precisely which would have gotten through and which would not have.

Sure, but something halfway reasonable must come to mind, no?

I don't follow this stuff, but I'm giving @StreetlightX the benefit of the doubt as being correct about what has been implemented. And then I'm reasoning that far less focus has been on what has been implemented and its implications, on account of the enormous focus on Trump, than there otherwise would have been. I don't think that is implausible at all. Focus and criticism are, after all like everything else, limited resources.

It was of fundamental importance for Aristotle's Politics and Nicomachean Ethics. ...Machiavelli's subtly is easily and often overlooked. It is only political leaders who are good who needs to be taught not to be good. Political leaders who are bad — Fooloso4

:rofl:

Trump is out there putting people in cages and Plutocrtizing the cabinet and someome thinks the most appropriate response is to extensively cite milennia old dead people on virtue ethics and the subtleties of Machiavelli. It's almost like you want Trump to win. The US burning down might not be such a bad thing after all. It'd take a bunch of political incompetants with it.

The US burning down might not be such a bad thing after all. It'd take a bunch of political incompetants with it. — StreetlightX

But then Australia would be China's butthole. Is that really what you want?

This is an interesting analysis, echoing our own conversation here:

You say that the shit's gonna hit the fan, presumably because of the Trump administration, yet you claim that Trump supporters have keener instincts for things that actually matter and that these keen instincts are better than someone lacking political literacy. What the hell?? — praxis

What seems to be the issue? It's pretty clear that a great deal of Trump's opponents have been uniquely useless at actually opposing anything whatsoever, insofar as their efforts continue to centre upon utterly unpolitical - that is to say, unactionable - vectors of resistance. Trump is stacking the courts and destorying the environment and apparently quoting a bit of Aristotle is supposed to count as making things better. It's pathetic. Most of this thread, which stacked to the brim with useless bullshit like the Muller investigation and wranging over Russia and Ukraine, is also pathetic.

But then Australia would be China's butthole. Is that really what you want? — frank

Relying on the US to do anything at this point would be folly. A nation in the throws of decline that would quite easily throw us to Chinese wolves. Not that our own political leaders are doing much better, mind you.

Relying on the US to do anything at this point would be folly. A nation in the throws of decline that would quite easily throw us to Chinese wolves. — StreetlightX

Dictatorship it is, then. Actually Chinese culture is fucking awesome, as I'm sure you know.

What happens to Republicans who express doubt about Trump:

Holding the line on impeachment, particularly by pressuring Republicans to remain in lockstep behind Trump, has quickly become the core mission of a squadron of pro-Trump television personalities, talk radio hosts, conservative blogs, fringe Facebook groups and Twitter accounts.

Together, these voices form an alternative worldview, built on hostility to mainstream media and capable of shaping the information consumed by core Republican voters.
“It’s tribal, and there are Trump cultists in the Republican Party who are constantly going to try to manufacture anything against the president’s critics,” said Mike Murphy, a Republican strategist and Trump critic whose clients have included Romney as well as the late senator John McCain of Arizona. “The easiest place to manufacture and disseminate that stuff is online.”


Romney is not the only Republican to feel the heat in recent days. Sen. Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa), after defending the whistleblower who raised alarm about Trump and Ukraine, faced withering criticism from the Gateway Pundit, a far-right blog that gained White House press credentials in 2017. “So much for the Republican leaders in the Senate defending President Trump against the continuation of the attempted coup,” the site warned.


Sen. Ben Sasse (R-Neb.), who said he was troubled by the whistleblower complaint, was accused by Big League Politics, a conservative website founded by former Breitbart employees, of “stabbing [Trump] in the back.”

Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-Ill.), who rebuked Trump for tweeting an ally’s prediction that removing him from office would spark “civil war,” was ridiculed as “garbage” and, in the telling of an Infowars editor, an example of “spineless sellouts.”

https://wapo.st/2LH2XVl

Man, I never thought I'd be agreeing with David Brooks but - "who ought to settle this? A few hundrerd thousand voters in the public or a hundred millionares in the Senate?" - that's exactly the right question.

In the meantime, people are apparently shocked that Republicans are holding the line on impeachment. Like - exactly what did you expect? Why are people continually surprised by the depths of depravity among Trump and his supporters? How do you remain this fucking naive almost three years in?

- points at which one might actually intervene to make a difference i.e. engage in politics and attempt to excercise agency. — StreetlightX

That takes character, to jump in and intervene, make a political difference. Trump did it, he's got character. The reasons for doing it define the character, good or bad.