Presuming no major third-party runs, Trump will lose 46 to 49 against any Dem short of Biden or Bernie (who'd both break 50). The electoral college won't save him this time. You read it here first. — Baden

My guess is that Trump is not the nominee. He reads the winds, which by then will be blowing hard, pronounces himself the American St. Donald, and retires. It's my hope his "retirement" lasts an asymptotically short time before he's perp walked from wherever he's found.

And the Republicans, unless they clean out their own house and are seen to have done it, will be clobbered. Disclaimer: in Massachusetts, the bluest state, there is a tradition of Republican Governors - real Republicans, it should be noted.

A definite possibility.

He’s going to win again. The reasons he won the first time are still in place, and some reasons have become stronger.

I’m tired of the “owning the libs” mentality, which is rife in Trump world. — NOS4A2

I'm tired of the whole "owning" mentality.

I'm tired of the whole "owning" mentality.

It’s base tribalism at this point. New political identities and ideologies are emerging and with them their ready-made list of tribesman and enemies.

I dislike him but I don’t hate him. Curiously, if the book contents is taken to be from the heart and not simply propaganda for the base, it could only read as an expression of hatred for the ‘left’.

There’s really no need to read it, we’ve already heard it all in the form of Trump tweets and speeches. The only thing that seemed new was the indication that he may run for office himself. He’s too much of a weeny to say one way or the other though, when asked.

One thing about this administration is the certainty of anyone associated with it ending up on the book circuit hawking their screeds. It’s almost inevitable.

I think this one is different in that it’s propaganda/self-promotion and not just to make a buck or promote a set of policies.

It’s becoming obvious there is abundant evidence of Trump having broken the law and violated his oath of office in his dealings with Ukraine, to the point where it’s no longer possible to deny.

So the GOP defense of Trump is going to have to be along the lines that although Trump did these things, it doesn’t amount to an impeachable offence, or doesn't constitute a crime (per this story).

And this is the exact way that Trump will continue to attempt to undermine the constitution and the rule of law - to convince his ‘base’ that whatever he has done must be OK (it must be OK, 'cause he did it!), and that any fault must reside with his accusers. The longer it drags out, the more the GOP hopes to normalise these ideas. So crimes aren't really crimes, the law doesn't apply here, the impeachment process is the crime, the accusers are the real wrong-doers.

That's what they're trying to sell, and I still cling to the romantic notion that it might actually fail. In any case, the televised hearings are about to commence, and the Reality Show President will soon find himself star of a reality television impeachment.

I’m just posting in hopes of some confirmation and/or clarification. I have had my head in the sand where I like it for quite a while but I was just reading/catching up on current politics.

Am I wrong, or didn’t the ‘whistleblower’ turn out to be a political adversary teamed up with a (pedophile?!) lawyer who was on record predicting a coup 2 years ago?

Like, first of all, WTF is going on with all these pedophiles?

Second of all, asking for Ukrainian help investigating political corruption just doesn’t seem like a big problem to me. If a frontrunning presidential candidate is involved in corruption, it’s in the interest of the US public to find out about it, right?

Am I wrong, or didn’t the ‘whistleblower’ turn out to be a political adversary teamed up with a (pedophile?!) lawyer who was on record predicting a coup 2 years ago? — Roke

Yes, you're wrong. It's typical of all the bullshit being spouted by various fringe conspiracists.

asking for Ukrainian help investigating political corruption just doesn’t seem like a big problem to me. If a frontrunning presidential candidate is involved in corruption, it’s in the interest of the US public to find out about it, right? — Roke

More Alt-Right misinformation. The only corruption at issue, was on the part of Trump, in withholding congressionally-approved aid monies in an attempt to force the Ukrainian government to support a completely baseless conspiracy theory. It's been abundantly documented that the steps Joe Biden took in connection with dealing with corruption in the Ukraine would have hurt, rather than helped, any effort to shield Hunter Biden's activities at Burisma, had there been any suggestion that these were corrupt, which there wasn't. The second bullshit story is the 'Hillary Clinton email server' being in the Ukraine, and the idea that the Ukraine framed Russia to get them blamed for the DNC hacks.

I think you might be trolling, but then you might also just be getting sucked in by all the rubbish being posted about this matter. Suggest broadening your media diet.

I don’t have a media diet. This is literally me trying to broaden my media diet. If you have truth don’t wield it like an asshole.

Lol, I wrote that down. “If you have truth dont wield it like an asshole”.
Love it, thanks.

The show trial begins. The Dems are immediately abusing the impeachment process for the purposes of influencing the 2020 election and to cover up Biden’s corruption. Schiff colluded with the alleged whistleblower before he blew the whistle, and it turns out the whistleblower, from the CIA, is connected to Biden. Their first “impeachment inquiry” was a sham process, essentially a job interview for those willing to perform in a public show trial against the president of the United States.

Ya know, I suspect you're really not an asshole, nos4, I really do. Maybe you have a family that you love and that loves you, or a pet cat, or even you just appreciate a nice walk around the yard on a nice day. But it's hard to square any of that with the asshole who writes the things that you write. Misdirection, lies, smoke, nonsense. For whom? For what? I doubt if there's medicine for your problem; you just have to learn to stop it. Who knows, maybe you'll find love again.

The Dems are immediately abusing the impeachment process for the purposes of influencing the 2020 election and to cover up Biden’s corruption — NOS4A2

:rofl:

Ya know, I suspect you're really not an asshole, nos4, I really do. Maybe you have a family that you love and that loves you, or a pet cat, or even you just appreciate a nice walk around the yard on a nice day. But it's hard to square any of that with the asshole who write the things that you write. Misdirection, lies, smoke, nonsense. For whom? For what? I doubt if there's medicine for your problem; you just have to learn to stop it. Who knows, maybe you'll find love again.

You waste your great writing in the service of tyranny and injustice. As such they are empty and without value. What a shame.

Can someone humor me and explain what’s going on, possibly even without dismissive political buzz speak? I go into an intermittent hermit mode and am just trying get a grasp of what’s happening. How significant are the roles of Eric Ciaramella and Mark Zaid?

How significant are the roles of Eric Ciaramella and Mark Zaid?

It’s been postulated that Ciaramella is the whistleblower that started this whole mess. I believe Facebook and YouTube censors anyone who mentions his name. There is zero reporting on him, so your average Guardian reader remains ignorant of who he is. Zaid is his lawyer and rabid anti-Trumper.

Empty and without value is what a trickster becomes when they’ve outlived their usefulness.

There is zero reporting on him — NOS4A2

Yes, just these 1.1 million results.



Maybe who you should and shouldn't be listening to is becoming clear now, @Roke.

Well done. You mined my quote and cherry picked six words from a 42 word statement. Let's see, one or two outlets...fair point... any Guardian articles in there?

:yawn:

Schiff’s assertion that Trump did such and such to “help his political campaign” is still without evidence, even after the Dems brought out their star witnesses. Schiff continues this lie. Another nothing-burger; another witch hunt.

There are none so blind as those who will not see. Republican attempts to deny the obvious would be hilarious were the stakes not so serious.

You waste your great writing in the service of tyranny and injustice — NOS4A2

One might accuse you of much the same, given your unwavering loyalty to your chosen cause. So are these more than words, "empty and without value"? Can you explain what makes the Tyranny?

One might accuse you of much the same, given your unwavering loyalty to your chosen cause. So are these more than words, "empty and without value"? Can you explain what makes the Tyranny?

I love how only my statements receive your criticism while everyone else's are pushed aside and covered for.

Here's my fantasy. After the public hearings, it becomes impossible to deny that Trump violated his oath of office and broke the law. Republicans, even though the want to absolve him, find that they can't underwrite his obvious mendacity and reluctantly conclude that the stench of corruption emanating from the Oval Office is too much even for Mitch McConnell. So either they inform him of this, and he resigns, or it goes to the floor vote, and he's impeached.

Next day, New York Times prints a front page story You're Fired! More than a million people turn up to the National Mall, many holding copies of the NYT, and gleefully chant 'You're Fired'.

Do I think it will happen? No. But it doesn't stop you from dreaming.

Schiff’s assertion that Trump did such and such to “help his political campaign” is still without evidence, even after the Dems brought out their star witnesses. Schiff continues this lie. Another nothing-burger; another witch hunt. — NOS4A2

Don't you think it's strange that the president of America is asking a foreign government to investigate American citizens? We can take the view that Trump is just anti-corruption, but why then did Trump withhold military aid to Ukraine? (And why can't Trump use America's own justice system to pursue justice? Asking foreign governments to handle matters which concern constitutional rights of Americans (habeus corpus for example) is a slippery slope, don't you agree?). One of the biggest ethical problems here, even if everything Trump says is true (innocent anti-corruption), is that by making military aid dependent on public investigations (why did they have to be public?) Ukraine basically is being given the idea that unless they find Biden's son guilty, aid might be withheld in the future. (so not only are they asking what might amount to a kangaroo court to prosecute an American, they're introducing a kangaroo of their own that will spoil the verdict).

There's simply no denying that withholding the military aid was about winning points in the domestic election, and there's no denying that it is an unethical abuse of power that subverts constitutional rights. If Trump is allowed to abuse the power of the U.S to make sure he wins the next election, what does that say about democracy, or the state of the union?

Why is it more important that Biden's son gets investigated than it is important that Russia not takeover Ukraine?