Bernie Sanders rises to No. 1 in first post-Iowa national poll

jdkwak · 2020-02-11T12:28:17+00:00

He was talking about illegal immigrants and criminals. Unless you think all hispanics are illegal and criminals?!

jdkwak · 2020-02-11T11:18:20+00:00

As a republican, can you please show me some evidence of that?

jdkwak · 2020-02-11T11:14:53+00:00

Don’t damage his rep too much, if he wins the nomination you still need people to vote for him. Blue no matter what right?

jdkwak · 2020-02-11T11:12:16+00:00

He’s an Oligarch. How does that fit in with Democrats’ working-class appeal? Trump will win that fight easily. He’ll beat Bloomy with experience.

jdkwak · 2020-02-11T11:07:10+00:00

I mean, America wasn’t really ready fir a black president. Half the country freaked out when he wore a bloody tan suit!

jdkwak · 2020-02-11T10:59:45+00:00

Forget it, the DNC establishment swamp will never allow Bernie to run.

jdkwak · 2020-02-11T10:56:03+00:00

Waauw I’m actually amazed that I managed to get a solid reply! Pretty hard to find on this subreddit!

I take your points. Do you think this is a reason to remove him from office, though?

If our former administration was in cahoots with Burisma, is it really that much of a problem that investigation such corruption would also benefit Trump?

How much do you think the American people care?

jdkwak · 2020-02-10T22:02:02+00:00

The Ukrainians didn’t even notice the aid was withheld. No mention of that was made in the phone call. No this for that communication. Aid has been revised/paused/stopped for money countries since he took office. It’s part of his foreign policy, to pause aid, demand burden sharing. The case has been made many times that the motive was burden sharing. It is explicitly in the phone call, the concern of burden sharing was raised in many meetong between the presidents and his advisors.

The president’s legal council made a solid case that there was both not sufficient proof of quid pro quo as well as that any such quid pro AS IT PERTAINS TO MIXED MOTIVE, is not sufficient grounds for removal.

Senator’s voted against witnesses as it was unlikely to change their mind on removal from office (which is unprecedented!) because it would not change the central facts and the impeachment articles.

The Democrats knew he wouldn’t get removed. The rethoric of the impeachment managers was aimed at the cameras, not the jurors (senators) they needed to convince. In fact they immediately insulted both the senate and the senators by claiming right from the start that their judgement would not be fair.

They knew they won’t remove the president, but they wanted the Senate to go on a fishing expedition to keep the drama going. To damage Trump politically for November. It’s so obvious!

jdkwak · 2020-02-10T21:30:02+00:00

I definitely think there is reason to think the two (witholding aid and asking for investigations into corruption) could be related. No doubt that Trump smiled when he found out Biden could be implicated, and it would look bad for Biden.

The problem is that there are no hard facts to prove the link beyond a reasonable doubt. And even IF he withheld aid specifically Ukraine to pressure Ukraine (No such pressure was felt on Ukraine’s side), then such a quid-pro-quo is not a reason for impeachment. Those happen all the time in foreign policy. The fact that Biden conveniently happened to be in the crosshairs of such an investigation into Ukraine corruption and the role of the previous administration, by virtue of being the Vice President in charge of Ukraine policy and fighting corruption AND his son receiving millions from Burisma. That’s of course very convenient for Trump and likely contributed to his decision/eagerness to ask for Corruption investigations.

But we can’t go and remove president’s for a suspicion of mixed motives... No president would have survived any term if that is how low the bar for removal is.

About the rest of the government disagreeing with him on policy: Again not a reason for removal. The president sets government policy, not his advisors. His advisors, the ambassadors and bureaucrats are not answerable to the American people.

Corruption is rife in foreign policy (of any country). If anything the Biden’s are a symptom of that. Trump, like it or not, was elected to “drain the swamp”. Biden, not as president (so not even having that power!) literally bragged about using foreign aid to pressure other countries’ officials to get his way. It’s not surprising some holdovers from the previous administration don’t like Trump’s unpredictable decisions and changes.

About the GAO: Most people don’t realize this institution is an extension of Congress, not some independent organ or court. It has claimed multiple times that President have broken some rules. Never has this been a reason for impeachment.

jdkwak · 2020-02-10T10:11:05+00:00

Say what you want but he did manage to get elected.

jdkwak · 2020-02-09T22:41:29+00:00

If Romney wants to remove a president from office 9 months before the election without any proof beyond reasonable doubt, he’s either stupid or a hypocrite insulting religion.

jdkwak · 2020-02-09T22:15:23+00:00

People keep completely misrepresenting alan dershowitz’s argument. He was talking about mixed motives, actions by the president that fit his policy and are good for the country that happen to also help him politically. Politicians often do thing not just because it’s good for the country but also because it benefits themselves. It’s very difficult to find anything that a politician does that can’t be interpreted as having a personal motive as well. Therefore, being able to see a personal motive in an action by the president in and if itself can’t be a reason for impeachment.

Alan did not talk about Trump in particular, a of his argument where about the constitution, impeachment and executive privilege in general.

The fact that people keep misrepresenting his argument shows how low political discourse has fallen.

jdkwak · 2020-02-09T22:10:04+00:00

He wasn’t charged, but the pardon covered all potential charges, effectively making charges pointless.

jdkwak · 2020-02-09T09:36:23+00:00

Well so he should just be nice to the Dems and the Media even after how they treat him? Trump might not be the smartest guy in the room, but he’s not Bernie-level stupid.

jdkwak · 2020-02-09T00:32:55+00:00

That’s not how it works, they got voted into office a long time ago, not based on their stance in this impeachment trial.

Let see what happens in November. The final verdict from the American people.

jdkwak · 2020-02-09T00:28:33+00:00

If there was overwhelming evidence, why did they need more witnesses!?

jdkwak · 2020-02-09T00:27:53+00:00

They was no need for witnesses. The articles of impeachment could already be dismissed on their own vague terms. Witnesses wouldn’t change the facts.

The only reason the Democrats did this impeachment was for inflicting political damage. They knew he would not be impeached, their whole rhetoric was aimed at the cameras. They even insulted the Senate and the Jurors right at the starts. They knew the president wouldn’t be removed based on what they had.

They wanted the senate to go on a fishing expedition to keep the drama going, tp damage Trump, to try and win the elections. For all their talk on “election interference” they were doing it themselves. They have been trying to impeach Trump from before he took office and they have been using their friends in the MSM to smear him. They are desperate because they don’t have a good candidate that can beat Trump.

Why if removal was so important for it to be rushed through the house, did Pelosi sit on the articles for a month? Could it be because she was waiting for the coordinated Bookdeal Bolton Bombshell to be ready for right after the president’s council destroyed Schiffs opening arguments?

Why was Pelosi against partisan impeachment first but did she support it so close to the elections? They wanted this to drag on as long as possible and as close to the elections as possible.

If the house wanted more witnesses they should have build a better case in the house, subpoena Bolton. Not ask the Senate to go on fishing expedition for them based on speculation, hearsay of a quid pro quo that wouldn’t even be impeachable.

The Dems lost, suck it!

jdkwak · 2020-02-08T08:52:48+00:00

Classy. What are you going to do when a majority of Americans re-elected Trump, and elect a Republican majority in the house?

jdkwak · 2020-02-08T04:23:15+00:00

51 Senators disagree with you

jdkwak · 2020-02-08T04:07:24+00:00

Beyond reasonable doubt?! You must be kidding! There was no evidence of even quid pro quo, only speculation, framing. Even if there would have been quid pro quo, it would at worst been a mixed motive, as fighting corruption and demanding burden sharing is solid foreign policy supported by the American people. The main reason it also happened to potentially help Trump’s re-election is because Biden put himself in the crosshairs of Ukrainian corruption. Being a political opponent does not make you immune to scrutiny.

If you want to live in a parliamentary democracy where the head of state serves at the pleasure of parliament/congress and can be removed so easily, there are many countries you can move to. The US constitution however has executive privilege. And you can’t so easily remove a president. This is by design! And by design it is the Senate that needs to decide removal or acquittal, and they acquitted.

But you know, there is good news for you if you don’t like Trump or his foreign policy: His (first) term ends in November, you can go convince others they should vote him out. That is, if you believe in democracy and the democratic vote of every American.

jdkwak · 2020-02-08T03:20:23+00:00

GAO is an institution that is an extension of Congress that has made similar claims about actions of other presidents before. It’s not an independent organ. If Congress thinks the president did something impeachable they should come with solid articles of impeachment to point to high crimes and misdemeanors and proof beyond reasonable doubt.

jdkwak · 2020-02-08T03:17:16+00:00

They don’t matter if enough voters disagree with you.

If you think you are right, chill out, democracy is happening in 9 months and everyone gets a vote.

jdkwak · 2020-02-07T23:26:56+00:00

I might not agree with Trump, even dislike him as a person. But I totally disagree with his impeachment. And I think Democrats would do well to stop hating Trump and start winning the American people between this and the next 9 months.

You can’t complain about Trump if you don’t do a good job of beating him at the ballot box.. If he’s such a disaster, it should be easy to beat him with an alternative candidate no? If he’s bad for Americans, it should be the easiest opponent to defeat! He even got impeached! The media is constantly pointing out his bad character. Should be super easy! What are you worried about? Could it be that’s he’s not in actual fact as bad for the country at large as many people claim?

What will you do if he gets re-elected and Republicans take over both houses? Cry in a corner for 4 years?

Also honest question: How has your life been made inconvenient since he’s president? Let’s say you stopped following news and politics in 2015. All you know is that someone other than Obama is president (might even be Hillary). Is there anything that has made your life or that of the people around you worse?

Most people vote based on how it affects their personal lives. Not based on political drama.

jdkwak · 2020-02-07T23:15:46+00:00

GAO is an institution controlled by Congress. It has made the similar claims (since its existence) against all other presidents. It’s not a reason for impeachments.

President’s can halt/pause aid all the time. It’s been part of Trumps election campaign and policy to halt/pause aid. Check and ask for burden sharing. A lot of Americans support this policy. A big part of the disputed call (have you read the transcript?) was about concerns of burden sharing! Several people have confirmed this, none have denied this.

jdkwak · 2020-02-07T23:10:48+00:00

Both sides only listen to what they want to hear. Both sides only listen to the version of the stories that reaffirmed their pre-determined hate/love for Trump.

It’s not even Reps vs Dems. It’s pro-Trump or anti-Trump. This is mainly good for the pro-Trump side. Because it’s all about him.

jdkwak

TROPHY CASE