S06.E15: Impeachment

[Athena]

Quote

Other segments: Steve Bullock, Duncan D. Hunter campaign finance scandal

 

[Annber03]

Well said, John. I fully agree we should go forth with impeachment, and I think we need to make it so Trump and the Republicans have two options: Either they convict him and he's ordered to leave, or Trump is forced to resign ('cause I agree he won't do it willingly, though I can easily see him spinning a resignation speech in his favor), and whichever route they go, if he doesn't willingly leave, they need to make him do so.  

The crazy thing is, while I fully understand the argument that the Democrats may be wanting to make sure they have a completely airtight case before going forward, it also seems like they could build a case just based off of Trump's public statements and actions of late alone. Openly ordering people like McGahn not to testify, stating on camera that he would accept information from a foreign nation against an opponent...that's all pretty blatant examples of obstruction of justice/support for illegal activity right there. 

(Honestly, I wonder what would happen if McGahn showed up and testified anyway? Just say screw it and defy Trump's order and show up. Let's see what happens.) 

And while I completely understand the frustration with the Democrats holding off, and the need to put the pressure on them, I think the media also need to start calling out the Republicans and holding them accountable, too. People need to ask them point blank what they'd do if the Democrats provided a solid impeachment case, and force them to try and explain or defend why they're shrugging off Trump's words and behavior. And that clip of Trump's interview from last week should be played on every news station imaginable on a regular basis when talking about this issue, so that more and more people can hear it for themselves and it can hopefully sink in (and hell, if there's a way to sneak that interview into conservative-leaning stations so Trump supporters can hear it, too, similar to the way LWT tonight has brought air time on Fox News, I say go for it). 

It just sucks that we even have to have a debate over something that should be so blatantly obvious at this point. It sucks to think that even if the Democrats do everything right going forward in trying to hold Trump to account, it might still backfire. It would be nice to get a guarantee that this whole mess will actually end the way it should. But I fully agree we shouldn't just sit on our hands, either. And John's reminder about how seemingly powerful people will always inevitably fall did help me feel a little better. Indeed, there has to be an Achilles' heel with Trump somewhere, and I hope we're getting close to finding it. 

Regarding the whole mess with that Duncan Hunter guy, first off, gotta love how a member of the "We're all about personal responsibility" GOP is willing to blame his wife for everything. Second, in that list of all the stuff he and his wife blew money on, I'm just struck by how they spent thousands of dollars on fast food, but only spent a little over a hundred and fifty on cosmetics. Okay. 

Also, I shouldn't be surprised that Brian Kilmeade apparently doesn't know what "hombre" means (even if you aren't well versed in Spanish, that word is so common) but for some reason I am anyway.

Edited June 17, 2019 by Annber03

[ahisma]

2 hours ago, Annber03 said:

I think we need to make it so Trump and the Republicans have two options: Either they convict him and he's ordered to leave, or Trump is forced to resign

I agree with your entire post, except I do think that there's the third option that the Senate won't vote to remove him. There are too many Senators that live in die-hard red states where they're more afraid of being primaried from the right than of not doing the right thing. (Mitch McConnell is one of them.) 

Still, I agree with John—get their vote on record so the entire country/history can judge them.

[Annber03]

16 minutes ago, ahisma said:

I agree with your entire post, except I do think that there's the third option that the Senate won't vote to remove him. There are too many Senators that live in die-hard red states where they're more afraid of being primaried from the right than of not doing the right thing. (Mitch McConnell is one of them.) 

Still, I agree with John—get their vote on record so the entire country/history can judge them.

Oh, definitely. Like John notes, many people have sadly resigned themselves to that likely outcome. 

But yes, if the Republicans continue to stand by him even after everything comes out, that should definitely become a weight around them going forward. That's the thing that gets me about the Republicans' resistance here. If they don't convict Trump, that could put them at risk of losing their jobs come election time. If they risk the wrath of Trump supporters (who are certainly a very loud and loyal base, but also not a majority of voters by any stretch) by actually holding him accountable, that could risk them their jobs, too, among those conservative voters. They're certain to lose some votes either way, yet god forbid they actually take the risk that benefits the country at large. It's just insane that a particular group of voters is essentially holding an entire party to do their bidding, and that the GOP cares more about placating them than actually doing the right thing. 

[attica]

I watched the list of shit Duncan Hunter spent campaign money on, and I think about the young women who have to beg the FEC to allow them to use campaign funds on child care so that they can run for office to unseat douchecanoes like Hunter. 

It's not good for my blood pressure, I tells ya.

[Lantern7]

Good episode about impeachment, with John not resorting to an episode-ending spectacle*. I'm thinking Rep. Pelosi is dragging her heels because the Democrats might become beyond fucked if they screw up. Or that the vast field of presidential hopefuls want to be the one to put a stake in the vampire's chest. It is disappointing that impeachment wouldn't automatically mean removal from office, especially because I've been wanting to see a perp walk from the White House since November 2016. I don't think he'd resign . . . but if he did, he'd probably blah something about how "they won't let you be successful anymore." And then Pence pardons him because of course he would.

A talking head of Fox studied German. That's a bit alarming, is it not?

SHS resigning: "Byeus Lieus." Took me a second longer to decipher. I like those bits in the opening graphics. Has anyone kept track of those through all six seasons?

*I like those. Please do not think I'm against fun.

[iMonrey]

That clip he showed of that elderly woman who said she listens to conservative media, and hadn't heard anything negative about Trump stemming from the Mueller report, was the same clip Sam Bee played on her show last week. It speaks to the bubble Republicans live in and why Republican senators stand by Trump. They tow the party line that he was exonerated, that Democrats are sore losers, and that this is a witch hunt. 

It's galling there are only 60 or so Democrats in Congress in favor of starting impeachment proceedings. I assume that's Representatives and Senators combined. The point isn't to remove Trump from office, we know that won't happen.  The point is to publicly air all the crimes laid out in the Mueller report and keep them on the public's mind rather than let Republicans and Fox News bury them. Democrats have the rare opportunity to control the narrative here and once again they're punting. 

[ganesh]

14 hours ago, Annber03 said:

It just sucks that we even have to have a debate over something that should be so blatantly obvious at this point. It sucks to think that even if the Democrats do everything right going forward in trying to hold Trump to account, it might still backfire.

John brought up two points I liked - no one is saying they won't impeach. There's still some groundwork - get the taxes, compel people to testify - as well as the ongoing investigations that may make for a stronger case. And - Pelosi isn't an idiot. There's no reason to hold a vote this year at all. You do it in 2020 and it dominates the campaign and puts Trump constantly on the defensive. You do it now, and no one will remember by the end of the year, let alone in 2020. 

Second, from the massively stupid lady, there's tons of people like that. Holding more hearings and getting that to dominate public discussion is just as important. The only reason the massively stupid lady even knew is because a republican politician told her. 

[peeayebee]

5 hours ago, Lantern7 said:

Good episode about impeachment, with John not resorting to an episode-ending SHS resigning: "Byeus Lieus."

I noted that one, too. Excellent.

Great show about impeachment. Frankly, I don't watch the evening news, or local news, so I wonder how many news shows have explained what impeachment actually is. Like Pelosi said, it's not vote and bye bye birdie. Sadly, many Americans (most?) think that's what it is, as if the Democrats want just to have a vote to boot him out without a hearing.

And, yes, so many Americans think the Mueller Report really said Trump did nothing wrong. Arg.

Impeachment employed as effective hospice care. Hee.

I hope Duncan's wife takes him down. They both deserve to go down. Love John referring to him as a blue ribbon dingdong dipshit.

I do love the name Eggburt, and also a book called Why Do Bad Men Name Bunnies Good.

Edited June 17, 2019 by peeayebee

[swanpride]

He is right. And I get the arguments against Impeachment. I am actually pretty sure that the Senate won't impeach, which will sent a terrible signal. But I agree with him that not even trying is sending an even worse signal. It is bad enough that one political party is abandoning democracy, the other shouldn't follow suit just because of the effect impeachment had on Clinton's popularity. That was different. Mainly because it genuinely was a witch hunt. Trump on the other hand is openly breaking the law AND bragging about it in public. If he doesn't get impeached, no president ever will. Which would give all of them carte blanche.

[swanpride]

Quote

A talking head of Fox studied German. That's a bit alarming, is it not?

What exactly is alarming about that? Though I noticed that in none of the clips he is actually speaking and/or translating German.

[iMonrey]

Quote

Love John referring to him as a blue ribbon dingdong dipshit.

I was trying to remember the entire insult. I need to figure out a way to work "blue ribbon ding-dong dipshit" into my vocabulary.

Quote

He is right. And I get the arguments against Impeachment. I am actually pretty sure that the Senate won't impeach, which will sent a terrible signal. But I agree with him that not even trying is sending an even worse signal.

There's a counter-argument that Pelosi is biding her time until the election is closer. I can see the reasoning; if they were to hold impeachment proceedings today the electorate would forget about them by next year. Would probably be better to have this all going on in 2020.

[meowmommy]

1 hour ago, iMonrey said:

I was trying to remember the entire insult. I need to figure out a way to work "blue ribbon ding-dong dipshit" into my vocabulary.

"Henrietta, if the blue ribbon ding-dong dipshit you married has finished pissing in the antique coffee urn and wiping his dick on the doilies, might you ask him to please pass the crumpets?"

[Annber03]

On 6/17/2019 at 1:34 PM, ganesh said:

John brought up two points I liked - no one is saying they won't impeach. There's still some groundwork - get the taxes, compel people to testify - as well as the ongoing investigations that may make for a stronger case. And - Pelosi isn't an idiot. There's no reason to hold a vote this year at all. You do it in 2020 and it dominates the campaign and puts Trump constantly on the defensive. You do it now, and no one will remember by the end of the year, let alone in 2020. 

Second, from the massively stupid lady, there's tons of people like that. Holding more hearings and getting that to dominate public discussion is just as important. The only reason the massively stupid lady even knew is because a republican politician told her. 

Exactly. This stuff needs to be made as public as possible, to the point where even conservative-leaning outlets can't avoid talking about it. I've seen recent clips from Fox News, of all places, where even they are acknowledging that Trump's poll numbers aren't good right now, and they've also discussed that interview with his comments about accepting foreign intel (granted, they haven't hammered at it the way any other typical news media outlet is or should, but still, it got brought up, which is a miracle in itself). If we can get even a few more conservative talking heads starting to question Trump's behavior, and bring up their concerns to their core audience, that could do wonders. 

I think the biggest reason people are anxious to get impeachment hearings going as soon as possible is because they're scared of what Trump might try and do in the meantime (like, for instance, the whispers going around lately of starting a war with Iran). They want something that can hopefully halt that. Which is a valid concern.

But yes, ultimately, should impeachment go forward, I absolutely want the case to be so airtight that there is literally nothing Trump or his cronies can do to try and get around it. 

On 6/17/2019 at 3:08 PM, peeayebee said:

Great show about impeachment. Frankly, I don't watch the evening news, or local news, so I wonder how many news shows have explained what impeachment actually is. Like Pelosi said, it's not vote and bye bye birdie. Sadly, many Americans (most?) think that's what it is, as if the Democrats want just to have a vote to boot him out without a hearing.

This is the sort of thing that should be taught in history classes in school, but I honestly wonder how many schools actually touch on that nowadays.

Quote

I do love the name Eggburt, and also a book called Why Do Bad Men Name Bunnies Good.

I would absolutely read that :D. I'm thinking Marlon Bundo's next adventure should involve meeting Eggbert. 

Edited June 19, 2019 by Annber03

[BuyMoreAndSave]

On 6/17/2019 at 12:02 AM, Annber03 said:

Openly ordering people like McGahn not to testify, stating on camera that he would accept information from a foreign nation against an opponent...that's all pretty blatant examples of obstruction of justice/support for illegal activity right there. 

And that clip of Trump's interview from last week should be played on every news station imaginable on a regular basis when talking about this issue, so that more and more people can hear it for themselves and it can hopefully sink in (and hell, if there's a way to sneak that interview into conservative-leaning stations so Trump supporters can hear it, too, similar to the way LWT tonight has brought air time on Fox News, I say go for it). 

Everyone just imagine for a second how people would have reacted if Obama said he would accept dirt on an opponent from other countries.

10 hours ago, Annber03 said:

This is the sort of thing that should be taught in history classes in school, but I honestly wonder how many schools actually touch on that nowadays.

It is. People forget most of what they learn in school.

[Annber03]

3 minutes ago, BuyMoreAndSave said:

Everyone just imagine for a second how people would have reacted if Obama said he would accept dirt on an opponent from other countries.

God, THIS. My mom and I talk about that all the time. If Obama or Hillary said and did even half of what Trump's been able to get away with during his time in office, the Republicans would've had impeachment hearings so fast your head would spin. And I would've supported that, because just as I don't want Trump getting away with this stuff, I wouldn't want a Democrat getting away with it, either. 

Quote

It is. People forget most of what they learn in school.

This is true. That's good to hear, though-I've heard a few troubling stories over the years about what some schools do and don't decide to teach nowadays, so I couldn't help wondering. 

[DEL901]

3 hours ago, Annber03 said:

God, THIS. My mom and I talk about that all the time. If Obama or Hillary said and did even half of what Trump's been able to get away with during his time in office, the Republicans would've had impeachment hearings so fast your head would spin. And I would've supported that, because just as I don't want Trump getting away with this stuff, I wouldn't want a Democrat getting away with it, either. 

This is true. That's good to hear, though-I've heard a few troubling stories over the years about what some schools do and don't decide to teach nowadays, so I couldn't help wondering. 

Remember the time Obama wore a tan suit?  He was vilified by the right for demeaning the presidency.

[BuyMoreAndSave]

8 hours ago, Annber03 said:

God, THIS. My mom and I talk about that all the time. If Obama or Hillary said and did even half of what Trump's been able to get away with during his time in office, the Republicans would've had impeachment hearings so fast your head would spin. And I would've supported that, because just as I don't want Trump getting away with this stuff, I wouldn't want a Democrat getting away with it, either. 

This is true. That's good to hear, though-I've heard a few troubling stories over the years about what some schools do and don't decide to teach nowadays, so I couldn't help wondering. 

Or when Trump said "I could kill someone in the middle of Fifth Avenue right now and people would still vote for me". Imagine all the 9/11 "I knew he was a terrorist!" stuff that would be said if it had been Obama that said that. Or all the racist comments that would be made if Obama had said "grab her by the...." It's just amazing to see all the complete in the gutter behavior from Trump that Republicans have enabled while still claiming to be the family values party.

Edited June 20, 2019 by BuyMoreAndSave

[Annber03]

9 hours ago, DEL901 said:

Remember the time Obama wore a tan suit?  He was vilified by the right for demeaning the presidency.

He bowed to world leaders, too! That made us look so weak! Trump acting like a total buffoon around our allies and alienating them, though? Yeah, that's totally fine. 

3 hours ago, BuyMoreAndSave said:

Or when Trump said "I could kill someone in the middle of Fifth Avenue right now and people would still vote for me". Imagine all the 9/11 "I knew he was a terrorist!" stuff that would be said if it had been Obama that said that. Or all the racist comments that would be made if Obama had said "grab her by the...." It's just amazing to see all the complete in the gutter behavior from Trump that Republicans have enabled while still claiming to be the family values party.

Mmhm. It was so maddening during the election-Hillary had to be all careful about what she said, lest she offend somebody (the uproar over her "deplorables" comment, anyone? Which was taken out of context, no less!). But Trump could go around and act like a total ass and he was just "telling it like it is!" and being himself and that was okay. 

It's just insane. I swear these last few years have made me feel like I'm in the Twilight Zone. 

[BabyVegas]

23 hours ago, Annber03 said:

On ‎6‎/‎17‎/‎2019 at 1:08 PM, peeayebee said:

Great show about impeachment. Frankly, I don't watch the evening news, or local news, so I wonder how many news shows have explained what impeachment actually is. Like Pelosi said, it's not vote and bye bye birdie. Sadly, many Americans (most?) think that's what it is, as if the Democrats want just to have a vote to boot him out without a hearing. 

This is the sort of thing that should be taught in history classes in school, but I honestly wonder how many schools actually touch on that nowadays.

My guess is very few. It's been about ten years since I was in high school, but I don't think we went much past WWII, even in my AP classes. I don't think we had a separate social studies/civics class past middle school and what we did learn was incredibly simplistic. We might have learned a general understanding of what Watergate was. Maybe. And we most certainly never touched on Johnson's impeachment. The closest thing to an education on impeachment that I remember getting was watching All The President's Men with my parents.

I think one of the reasons that people don't really get impeachment is because it's not well-taught in schools and the media kind of slurs it together into one thing. Frankly, an explainer on the mechanics of impeachment is not feasible within the structure of most news programs. LWT is built for the kind of in-depth explanation it requires, but most news is geared towards much shorter segments.

Plus, where LWT takes a lot of time to define terms and make sure its viewers are working from an accurate vocabulary, a lot of news shows aren't rigid about terminology. They'll talk about Nixon but they rarely make a point of emphasizing that impeachment inquires were opened but Nixon was never formally impeached. And when they talk about Clinton's impeachment in one breath and then Nixon's resignation in the next, it probably confuses a lot of people because it's a distinction that requires some time to make. 

[ganesh]

I did a big project on impeachment. I found original source materials from the constitutional convention! 

We had a current events class in high school and wouldn't you know, it was during Anita Hill. Me and my hot gf got out of biology class because we had to go watch the hearings for class. 

My history teacher was thorough af and we covered impeachment. We even watched the movie. He had us read scholarly papers too, so it was a dense class. 

[BuyMoreAndSave]

22 hours ago, BabyVegas said:

My guess is very few. It's been about ten years since I was in high school, but I don't think we went much past WWII, even in my AP classes. I don't think we had a separate social studies/civics class past middle school and what we did learn was incredibly simplistic. We might have learned a general understanding of what Watergate was. Maybe. And we most certainly never touched on Johnson's impeachment. The closest thing to an education on impeachment that I remember getting was watching All The President's Men with my parents.

I think one of the reasons that people don't really get impeachment is because it's not well-taught in schools and the media kind of slurs it together into one thing. Frankly, an explainer on the mechanics of impeachment is not feasible within the structure of most news programs. LWT is built for the kind of in-depth explanation it requires, but most news is geared towards much shorter segments.

Plus, where LWT takes a lot of time to define terms and make sure its viewers are working from an accurate vocabulary, a lot of news shows aren't rigid about terminology. They'll talk about Nixon but they rarely make a point of emphasizing that impeachment inquires were opened but Nixon was never formally impeached. And when they talk about Clinton's impeachment in one breath and then Nixon's resignation in the next, it probably confuses a lot of people because it's a distinction that requires some time to make. 

Don't most high schools have a civics class though?

We had US history (I think in 11th grade it was AP by default but it wasn't required to take the AP exam at the end, but I don't really remember) but I know we definitely covered impeachment as well as the 25th Amendment and that type of stuff. I distinctly remember learning in school that impeachment meant having to go to court and not actually being kicked out yet, and being surprised. I think in high school we got to the end of the 80s and I also took freshman US history in college and we got through Bush I. Also Andrew Johnson was impeached so it should have been covered anyway.

I miss history class actually because it was my favorite subject and I wish I remembered more of what we learned. I often wonder how this administration will be taught in high school history classes 20 years from now.

The PBS News Hour should do a segment on it at least. They do in-depth segments on a lot of their programs. In fact LWT gets a lot of their stories from PBS News Hour, Frontline, and ProPublica. But the people who watch PBS tend to be more educated and likely to seek out information for themselves anyway. In the internet age people also can take it upon themselves to learn easily so there isn't as much of an excuse for ignorance.

[BabyVegas]

6 hours ago, BuyMoreAndSave said:

Don't most high schools have a civics class though?

It's less common to have a dedicated civics class these days. In our school it got combined with history and then we had the option of taking a class in "government" for one year. We had to take a science class, an English class, a math class, a history/social studies class, and then we had two electives (usually a language and music/drama/similar). Civics classes have largely fallen by the wayside in favor of classes that teach standardized test subjects. Which kind of ties back to the LWT episode from a few years ago about the problems with standardized testing. If it's not on the tests, it doesn't get taught with any real rigor. Impeachment is mentioned in the AP US Government curriculum, but it doesn't look like it's covered in any great depth. It looks like it's covered as a subtopic under constitutional checks and balances. 

I'm glad John covers these types of topics. He does such a great job using humor to break the barrier so that people want to learn. I sent his net neutrality piece to a few of my older relatives to explain the importance of it and I imagine I'll probably end up sending this piece to a few people I know who don't really understand impeachment.

Edited June 22, 2019 by BabyVegas

[angora]

On 6/20/2019 at 4:21 PM, Annber03 said:

He bowed to world leaders, too! That made us look so weak! Trump acting like a total buffoon around our allies and alienating them, though? Yeah, that's totally fine. 

Mmhm. It was so maddening during the election-Hillary had to be all careful about what she said, lest she offend somebody (the uproar over her "deplorables" comment, anyone? Which was taken out of context, no less!). But Trump could go around and act like a total ass and he was just "telling it like it is!" and being himself and that was okay.

Or like John's example in the episode of another way Trump could win in 2020:  "Trump is caught on tape saying the N-word, but two weeks later, Elizabeth Warren accidentally calls a veteran a veterinarian, and people are even madder about that!"

Re:  the actual definition of impeachment, as someone who's worked as an ASL interpreter in a school district for a number of years, I can attest that it's taught in schools, a little in U.S. Government and at least touched on in U.S. History.  I believe the definition used by our textbook for "impeach" is "to formally accuse a president of wrongdoing."  But despite the teachers teaching that, it doesn't necessarily stop them from using it as the more popular conflation at the same time.  It can be tricky to interpret - in ASL, concept/meaning carries more weight than a physical word, so, as meant in the textbook, I would sign "impeach" similar to "accuse," but if someone's using it in the more colloquial sense, I would sign it more like "force him/her to step down" or "force him/her out."

[andromeda331]

On 6/20/2019 at 3:21 PM, Annber03 said:

He bowed to world leaders, too! That made us look so weak! Trump acting like a total buffoon around our allies and alienating them, though? Yeah, that's totally fine. 

Mmhm. It was so maddening during the election-Hillary had to be all careful about what she said, lest she offend somebody (the uproar over her "deplorables" comment, anyone? Which was taken out of context, no less!). But Trump could go around and act like a total ass and he was just "telling it like it is!" and being himself and that was okay. 

It's just insane. I swear these last few years have made me feel like I'm in the Twilight Zone. 

Me too. Its just so insane. The Democrats have to be all so careful about everything they say, while Trump can be as hateful, horrible and stupid as he wants so few care. It would probably take forever to list all of the horrible stuff he's said since 2016. That's just what he said that's not including anything he's done.

The woman they interview is what is so frustrating about his supporters. She believes 100% that Trump innocent because a Conservative Republican on a Conservative news channel said so. She won't even bother to read the report herself. I get its 400 pages but its the report that you think exonerates the President you support, why haven't you read it? Wouldn't you want to? So you can quote how it proves he was innocent. I just really don't understand how people like her look at everything Trump has done and think oh well he's innocent. What makes him innocent? That he has said he would still accept information from a foreign power? How about how many times Trump couldn't do something he wanted illegally only because people around him refused to carry out his orders. That's not good. It only didn't happen because people defied him and refused to carry out orders. That's bad. What is it about him that so many people are willing to blindly follow and not care how many laws he has broken? How many times he has obstructed justice? I might understand it if he's done even a little good. But he really hasn't.  

I did like John pointing out that a lot of powerful men have been brought down. That was a nice reminder.

I did like him explaining what Impeachment means my classes in school barely touched on it too and it was only on Johnson (we never ever made it past WWII). I do like that he does take time to explain stuff like that. 

I do get why the Democrats are hesitate but that can't be reason not to go after someone who is breaking the law, openly admitting that he would accept foreign interference, keeping people from testifying and so much more. If Clinton or Obama had done even half the shit Trump has I'd be all for going after them too. It really does feel like the Twilight Zone. 

[ganesh]

9 minutes ago, andromeda331 said:

I did like him explaining what Impeachment means my classes in school barely touched on it too and it was only on Johnson

Us too but that was because Clinton wasn't president yet. 

[andromeda331]

5 minutes ago, ganesh said:

Us too but that was because Clinton wasn't president yet. 

Well, that's a good reason not too! He was President when I was in school. But our books were so old that everything ended with the end of WWII. We used to joke about the world must have ended in 1945 or nothing has happened since.