• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

American politics

Speaker Nancy Pelosi says the House of Representatives will file impeachment charges against US President Donald Trump for alleged abuse of power.

"Our democracy is what is at stake, the president leaves us no choice but to act," the top elected Democrat said.

She spoke a day after the House Judiciary Committee began considering potential charges against the Republican president.

Mr Trump told Democrats to move quickly if they were going to impeach him.

He tweeted shortly before Mrs Pelosi's remarks: "If you are going to impeach me, do it now, fast, so we can have a fair trial in the Senate, and so that our country can get back to business."

The California congresswoman told Thursday morning's news conference: "The facts are uncontested. The president abused his power for his own political benefit at the expense of our national security, by withholding military aid and a crucial Oval Office meeting in exchange for an announcement for an investigation into his political rival."

She added: "Sadly, but with confidence and humility, with allegiance to our founders and a heart full of love for America, today I am asking our chairmen to proceed with articles of impeachment."

Democrats are keen to hold a vote on impeachment in the House of Representatives before the end of the year, with the prospect of a trial in the Senate perhaps as early as January 2020.

White House press secretary Stephanie Grisham said immediately afterwards that the Democrats "should be ashamed".

She added: "We look forward to a fair trial in the Senate."

Mrs Pelosi's statement came a day after she held a behind-closed-doors meeting on impeachment with her fellow Democrats and asked them: "Are you ready?"

The lawmakers responded with a rousing "Yes", according to the Associated Press news agency.
 
Rorschach said:
Worth a read
https://twitter.com/x/status/1202370124797370368
Click to expand...
Interesting read but he's way off point imo.

In the USSR there was state owned media and nothing else. All media output was controlled by the government and nothing else was allowed to exist (welcome to nationalisation, people).

This is a media source, in a free press, that is from the same end of the political spectrum to the president. There is also a whole load of media sources that are not aligned with the president's opinion, and everyone is free to use them as a source whenever they choose.

That's not to say Trump hasn't started a war against the press and that I don't think he'd like to get rid of the free press, because I think he would. He's absolutely not a Republican in any guise I recognise - he's anti-free trade, pro-state control, he may have reduced taxes but I don't believe there's an economic ideology behind doing so. His methods and politics are far more closely related to that of Soviet Russia, so in that sense there are some comparisons. But I think there are plenty enough economic republicans who won't allow Trump to go down that road towards the USSR. Communism is still (rightfully) a dirty word in the US.
 
scaramanga said:
Interesting read but he's way off point imo.

In the USSR there was state owned media and nothing else. All media output was controlled by the government and nothing else was allowed to exist (welcome to nationalisation, people).

This is a media source, in a free press, that is from the same end of the political spectrum to the president. There is also a whole load of media sources that are not aligned with the president's opinion, and everyone is free to use them as a source whenever they choose.

That's not to say Trump hasn't started a war against the press and that I don't think he'd like to get rid of the free press, because I think he would. He's absolutely not a Republican in any guise I recognise - he's anti-free trade, pro-state control, he may have reduced taxes but I don't believe there's an economic ideology behind doing so. His methods and politics are far more closely related to that of Soviet Russia, so in that sense there are some comparisons. But I think there are plenty enough economic republicans who won't allow Trump to go down that road towards the USSR. Communism is still (rightfully) a dirty word in the US.
Click to expand...
He makes that point that it's not the same. Your points are very close.

I'll respond on the rest later ;)
 
Last edited:
scaramanga said:
Interesting read but he's way off point imo.

In the USSR there was state owned media and nothing else. All media output was controlled by the government and nothing else was allowed to exist (welcome to nationalisation, people).

This is a media source, in a free press, that is from the same end of the political spectrum to the president. There is also a whole load of media sources that are not aligned with the president's opinion, and everyone is free to use them as a source whenever they choose.

That's not to say Trump hasn't started a war against the press and that I don't think he'd like to get rid of the free press, because I think he would. He's absolutely not a Republican in any guise I recognise - he's anti-free trade, pro-state control, he may have reduced taxes but I don't believe there's an economic ideology behind doing so. His methods and politics are far more closely related to that of Soviet Russia, so in that sense there are some comparisons. But I think there are plenty enough economic republicans who won't allow Trump to go down that road towards the USSR. Communism is still (rightfully) a dirty word in the US.
Click to expand...

I mostly agree with you.

There is a free press, but attacks on any part of the press that's critical of him. A large degree of polarization where people's consumption of media that doesn't agree with their side is very low. Made worse by social media, but also driven (imo) by attempts to vilify any opposition. It happens on both sides, but with a frequency and intensity on the republican side that's truly scary.

The republicans in congress are mostly a spineless, amoral bunch beaten into submission by Trump. They caused this to a large extent, but are seemingly happy with the situation as long as they get tax cuts, conservative judges and attacks on any group of people they can conceive to marginalize.

You won't get USSR communism, that's not the -ism Trump is stumbling towards. If they, or the democrats will resist fascism is the question. I think they will, but I'm less confident than I would have been had that question been posed five years ago. At which point I would have laughingly asked about intoxicating substances and conspiracy theories.
 
braineclipse said:
I mostly agree with you.

There is a free press, but attacks on any part of the press that's critical of him. A large degree of polarization where people's consumption of media that doesn't agree with their side is very low. Made worse by social media, but also driven (imo) by attempts to vilify any opposition. It happens on both sides, but with a frequency and intensity on the republican side that's truly scary.

The republicans in congress are mostly a spineless, amoral bunch beaten into submission by Trump. They caused this to a large extent, but are seemingly happy with the situation as long as they get tax cuts, conservative judges and attacks on any group of people they can conceive to marginalize.

You won't get USSR communism, that's not the -ism Trump is stumbling towards. If they, or the democrats will resist fascism is the question. I think they will, but I'm less confident than I would have been had that question been posed five years ago. At which point I would have laughingly asked about intoxicating substances and conspiracy theories.
Click to expand...
I think where the GOP will block him is not on matters of principle - they sold those a long time ago. They will fight back when he stops ceding ground to their religious fanatics. I don't see that there is much room for imaginary friends in any heavily authoritarian outcome - be that left or right. But the one thing those cranks in the Republican party will defend is their religion.
 
scaramanga said:
I think where the GOP will block him is not on matters of principle - they sold those a long time ago. They will fight back when he stops ceding ground to their religious fanatics. I don't see that there is much room for imaginary friends in any heavily authoritarian outcome - be that left or right. But the one thing those cranks in the Republican party will defend is their religion.
Click to expand...

Disagree completely, in general not about the specific example of the US.

Religion has been both a useful tool and even sometimes a driving force in many a authoritarian state. I see no reason why it would be any different in the US. Religion being a useful tool is part of the reason it's gone as far as it already has.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back