kiaa (
kiaa) wrote in
talkpolitics2019-10-23 08:50 am
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png)
Feel that rope tightening yet, Donnie?
House Democrats zero in on 'abuse of power' in Trump impeachment inquiry
"Pelosi is said to favor one sweeping charge related to Ukraine, but there's some debate about the need for additional charges."
All partisanship aside, this seems like an interesting turning point. I guess the options the Dems are facing right now are, do they put all eggs in one basket and go with a single article for impeachment - or do they try and have as many articles as possible, and have each of them reviewed and voted separately? I'd surely opt for the latter.
It's kind of like over-charging in a court case. Do you reach with murder when manslaughter is a lock? Hmmm, what a dilemma.
I think the problem here is time. What you've got now is obvious abuse of power, PLUS contempt of Congress on the Ukraine case... So, trying to add more articles regarding other aspects of Trump's behavior (like emoluments) would seem like a waste of time, energy and focus.
I'm kind of inclined to agree with Nancy here. I mean, less is more in cases like these. Where do you stand on this?
"Pelosi is said to favor one sweeping charge related to Ukraine, but there's some debate about the need for additional charges."
All partisanship aside, this seems like an interesting turning point. I guess the options the Dems are facing right now are, do they put all eggs in one basket and go with a single article for impeachment - or do they try and have as many articles as possible, and have each of them reviewed and voted separately? I'd surely opt for the latter.
It's kind of like over-charging in a court case. Do you reach with murder when manslaughter is a lock? Hmmm, what a dilemma.
I think the problem here is time. What you've got now is obvious abuse of power, PLUS contempt of Congress on the Ukraine case... So, trying to add more articles regarding other aspects of Trump's behavior (like emoluments) would seem like a waste of time, energy and focus.
I'm kind of inclined to agree with Nancy here. I mean, less is more in cases like these. Where do you stand on this?
no subject
However, Trump isn’t a clever-clogs like Boris. Trump didn’t coast to just missing a first purely on brainpower and no work whatsoever. Trump isn’t clever enough to couch his desires in acceptable forms; he’s always been a hammer that looked on every problem as a nail.
But even so, will America impeach the Don for being the Don? It’s what they elected him for.
I remain in doubt that rational folk will get the result that serves justice in any of these cases.
But I live in hope. And I may allow the greased piglet the respect due to his machinations; for from a pretty barren hand, a Yarborough even, he’s conjured a good few tricks. But still his cause is unjust, so I will oppose him.
no subject
no subject
“The thing about the greased piglet is that he manages to slip through other people’s hands where mere mortals fail.”
Of course, for a Classicist of Boris’s standing Porcellae uncta is a breed apart.
My amateurish advice on the matter?
no subject
One or two clear charges that make it clear Mr Trump was using his office for personal gain and which don't implicate any senators would be the sweet spot. Overreaching could cost both the impeachment and the election.
no subject
no subject
no subject
There’s a chap who had the foresight to realise that everyone gets found out sooner or later, and having the written orders to hand is best protection from accusations of personal wrongdoing. I wonder how many other officials kept full paper-trails?
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject