The horizon is not so far as we can see, but as far as we can imagine

Why Republicans Are Unlikely To Impeach Trump

This is why the bar for impeachment is so high.

In Alabama, GOP voters delivered a rebuke to incumbent Rep. Martha Roby, who is headed for a runoff against former congressman Bobby Bright — whom Roby defeated in 2010 when Bright held office as a Democrat.

Roby angered constituents by un-endorsing then-candidate Donald Trump after the 2016 release of the “Access Hollywood” tape in which he bragged about groping women. In TV ads, Bright accused Roby of “[turning] her back on President Trump when he needed her the most.”

The Access Hollywood tape was the “grab them by the pussy” tape.

The base supports Trump. You have to get past the base in primaries to be a candidate in the general. This is why the fact that Democratic primary voters are basically ok with Democrats makes change from the left hard: they did mostly vote for Hillary, Bernie’s won independents.

The right did take over the Republican party, and they did it by winning primaries. Every recent attempt by the left to do the same in the Democratic party has failed.

Trump has very consistently acted to frame Mueller’s investigation as partisan, so that whether to impeach him becomes a political decision. In any Congress where Republicans have enough votes to stop impeachment, it will be very hard for Republicans to vote to impeach Trump: doing so will mean a serious primary challenge they may well lose.

The results of the work I do, like this article, are free, but food isn’t, so if you value my work, please DONATE or SUBSCRIBE.


The Yemeni Holocaust


Canada’s Trump Now Premier of Canada’s Largest Province


  1. Anon

    Your basic analysis is correct but you have trouble determining the underlying causes of trends because you don\’t account for heredity. According to the 2011 Europoll and the GSS political and religious affiliation is 93% inheritable. That number is derived both from adopted individuals reflecting the preferences of their biologic parents and separated twins reflecting each other\’s proclivities. It is what the data says and it has been reproduced multiple times in both longitudinal surveys and in academic studies(twin studies are particularly popular in Europe). And then there is the larger and more well known difference in social proclivities between the ethnographic groups(races).

    The GSS also tracks birthrates quite thoroughly and you will some interesting trends. There is a disparity in birthrates between white democrats and republicans, 1.3 to 2.2, respectively, but that trend becomes even more pronounced when you apply descriptive criteria to the respondents answers regarding social and economic preferences. In that case the leftwing whites have a birthrate of 0.9 and the right wing whites have a birthrate of 2.7. This disparity first appeared 80 years ago and become about this pronounced in the 60s. It has now been maintained continuously for 4 generations and you are beginning to see the results. Whites alive today are more rural and more right wing than whites 50 years ago and the end members of this spectrum have the greatest disparity in birthrates. Every white man under 30 I\’ve spoken to in rural America openly advocates racial expropriation(ie the exile or death of all non-whites in the US and possibly the invasion and extermination of selected non-whites in other nations). Nor is this a new sentiment if you read the works of Washington and Franklin both advocated a genocidal campaign to clear the mixed-race population we now refer to as Hispanics from the Americas.

    The fact is that there isn\’t a young cohort of leftist whites of sufficient size to create political shifts in the democratic party whereas the young right wing whites operate openly on the internet to push opinions(there is a reason why almost all newspapers and blogs closed their comment sections or at least made them by invitation only after 2016). There was a large movement on the image boards to harass these comment sections and post propaganda there and this was not a manufactured movement. If anything the extant GOP is resisting this change and Trump is continually haranged for not being right wing enough and is seen as merely a stepping stone.In effect much of the Republican voter base was always \”far right\” but it wasn\’t politically viable to

    This fundumental change in the character of the nation(which is essentially a change derived from the reproductive success of the Cavalier/Germanic mercenary contingents of the white population over the Roundhead/Post-1890 immigrant portions) has been obfuscated by the deliberate importation of a non-white voter base in the form of Hispanics. Neither the GOP nor DNC want what has happened in the white population to break out as they will both be thrown out of power. Or perhaps more accurately they will overtaken and the Democratic party would be home to those amiable toward welfarism in the form of Nation Socialism(ie Prussianism with new coat of paint) and the Republican party would likely become or be replaced by some combination of Feudalism, Americanism(libertarianism mixed with fascism before those terms existed). In effect much of the Republican voter base was always \”far right\” but it wasn\’t politically viable to so now that the situation in the white voter base has reached a kind of critical mass you are seeing all sorts of popularists and racialists running. They want somebody further right than Trump, even the older ones say he is merely a means to an end and they want somebody harder.

    If it was not for the continual importation of non-whites this change would have already happened. And the current non-white population cannot maintain even its current influence without futher importation. Once again it comes down to the birthrates: 1.4 for blacks, 1.6 for hispanics, 0.8 for jews, 1.2 for asians, ect. They are all significantly below replacement rate according to the GSS and even in Europe the current muslim immigrants birthrates drop below replacement rate after the first generation. The reason is that the bread and circuses of modernity are poison. Anyone susceptible to them is being distracted from basic biologic imperatives and when this is coupled with the access to contraception or effective infanticide the result is only those deliberately looking to breed are breeding sufficiently to maintain their population. This is why the immigration debate is so vehement, at least a small portion of those running the DNC have accepted these statistics.

    The non-whites seem largely incapable of organizing themselves (I\’ll leave it to you to guess why that is) and cannot swing the democratic party in a direction you would consider leftist because their \”organizing\” for the last 60 years has always been at the behest of the entrenched white controlled \”left\” who used them against the white controlled \”right\”.

  2. Glenn May

    Trump has been able to frame the Mueller investigation as partisan because of course it is.
    The Democrats had two choices on how to react to Clinton’s loss: recognize it as a rebuke of the status quo and embark on a far-reaching review of what the party stands for OR look for a scapegoat.
    It chose the second path, future consequences up to and including direct confrontation with a nuclear-armed “opponent” be damned. And yes, impeachment – no matter how egregious the administration’s behavior – was rendered politically impossible.
    You makes your bed and you lies in it.

  3. Herman

    Most people on this blog probably won’t agree with me but I think this is a reason why opening up the primary process in the 1970s was a mistake. The reforms in the 1970s and onward were designed to make politics more democratic and take power away from party elites in their smoke-filled rooms. But instead it empowered the most unrepresentative and extreme voters. Now politics is dominated by these people who are much more likely to put culture war issues (abortion, gay wedding cakes, transgender bathrooms) on the agenda than meat and potatoes economic issues. This is true for both major parties.

    Making things more democratic does not always produce better results. Most people are not that interested in politics, that is why empowering voters often only empowers the crankiest, most tribalist voters. Very few people vote in primaries and they are a very unrepresentative bunch. Bernie’s independent voters are probably less active in politics and vote less often than the hardcore Clinton voters who were tribal Democratic voters. These tribal Democrats (and Republicans) control the primary process.

    The Left doesn’t get this because they often don’t understand how politics works. Leftists tend to put too much faith in ordinary people. Most ordinary Americans know very little about politics and are not that interested in politics. This is not some elitist sneer. It is perfectly rational for people to not pay too much attention to politics because they have little chance of directly impacting political decisions. Why aggravate yourself with politics when you are busy working two jobs just to survive?

    Americans were probably better off with the old political machines. They produced better leaders and more representative politicians. Sure there was corruption but there is a lot of corruption today only now it is called “lobbying” or the “revolving door” instead of “honest graft.” If anyone doubts me look at the stats on how Americans feel about their government and representatives. Trust in political institutions has been declining for decades. We have more open and democratic politics now than in the past and yet Americans are less happy with our politics than ever before.

  4. Hugh

    Impeachment is akin to an indictment. It is a list of charges, may be initiated by any member of the House, and may be approved in whole or by article by a simple majority in the House. This indictment is then presented to the Senate by managers selected by the House. A trial is then conducted in the Senate. A two-thirds majority is required for conviction.

    So if the Democrats take back the House in the November elections, the path to impeachment is fairly easy. It’s conviction in the Senate trial that would be hard. This is because the Republicans are a bunch of corrupt opportunistic cowards who stand for nothing and slavishly obey the bidding of bigots, the rich and corporations, the country and the rest of us be damned. The contrast could not be more stark with the Democrats, who are corrupt opportunistic cowards who stand for nothing and slavishly obey the bidding of the rich and corporations, the country and the rest of us be damned.

    Other points: Mueller, Rosenstein, and Comey are all Republicans.

    As the Hillary coronation demonstrated and the leadership positions of Schumer and Pelosi continue to show, the party elites and smoke-filled rooms are still doing just fine on the Democratic side. And how has that been working out for you?

    Both parties are tribal. The chief difference is that Republican pols have to throw some red meat at their base so they can subvert their interests the rest of the time while the Democratic pols don’t even bother with this level of charade.

  5. S Brennan

    Agree with Glenn May.

    A point made by a poster that a significant number of the most right-wing reactionary Republicans supported a “Goldwater Girl” for president can’t be made too often…although that is something the poster did not intend it.

    Today’s Democratic party offers the uppermost echelons of power a much more compliant servant to cater their most nauseous of whims.

  6. alyosha

    Impeachment would be very difficult. A much lower bar, easier to attain goal is to throw a wrench in the Republican monopoly of power – flip the House of Representatives in November.

    As I watched the election returns November 2016, I didn’t know what was worse – the orange buffoon or total Republican control. As Mitch McConnell later stated, “he’ll sign anything we give him”.

    This is also why McConnell canceled the Senate’s August recess – to rush through as many nominees as possible, before it all ends this November.

    Trump has been able to frame the Mueller investigation as partisan because of course it is. I don’t buy that. Nearly all the parties involved are Republicans, and they’ve doing everything by the book as much as possible.

  7. Ché Pasa

    Impeachment of presidents is always political. Success or failure of a presidential impeachment is a political act. The question is who is calling the shots.

    Even with a Democratic controlled House — which is looking likely come the November election — impeachment of Trump may not happen. The refusal of the Dems to look into impeaching Bush when they had a chance — and they knew full well that the Iraq debacle was about as high a crime and misdemeanor as a president can commit– is the surest clue we might need that if they gain control of the House again, they’ll wiff again. Because impeachment is political, and the politics of impeaching Trump would be disastrous.

    Rs are masters at feeding their base, but Dems also feed the R base, not their own. Dems also curry the R elites.

    If those elites want Trump gone, he will be gone, but so far, they’ve been getting so much out of him, they’re satisfied with his presence on the throne, so he’s likely to stay no matter which party controls the House and Senate. On the other hand, if the R base turns on him (very unlikely) the R elites — which also influence or control the Dems — will be more inclined to removing Trump, but probably not through impeachment.

    There are, after all, plenty of other means available.

  8. Willy

    The theories that some kind of Democrat party deep state apparatus is employing Republican henchmen to git Trump are getting a bit ridiculous. Not everybody believes that the end justifies the means. There really can still be people out there who believe in (gasp) rule of law.

    As is being said, the idea that Trump is some kind of outsider trying to burn down the system is also equally ridiculous. Most of what he’s ‘burned down’ are more the established institutional and check/balance norms, and far less any elite corruption.

  9. Sid Finster

    Team D would rather lose with a moderate than win with a progressive, as predicted by the Iron Law of Institutions.

  10. NR


    Very well said.

  11. different clue

    @Glenn May,

    After the McGovern defeat, the Official Democrats worked to “de-democratize” the nominee-selection process. The Official Democrat Overlords went back to choosing the nominee in money-filled rooms. That is how the ODOs awarded the nomination to Obama even though it looked increasingly clear that Clinton would win delegate counts and floor-fight votes, if there were to be any.

    And in 2015, Clinton herself worked with the ODOs ( Official Democrat Overlords) to rig the primary process against the Sanderbackers, resulting in an engineered win and an engineered nomination for Clinton.

    So the ODOs are demonstrating the efficacy of picking the nominee by less-democratic means, through cabals of lobby-gods in money-filled rooms. Has that proven to be any more efficacious?

  12. Chipper

    Would impeaching Trump make any difference? I ask this as a serious question. My own take is that it won’t solve anything, but there are contributors here whose opinions I respect and who might persuade me.

  13. bruce wilder

    First the Right re-enacted WWII as the farcical invasion and occupation of Iraq and now the Democrats are trying to re-enact the civil rights struggles of the 1960s plus Watergate.

    We do this fakery because power has been drained out of politics, at least out of the formal political institutions, by the emergence of an oligarchy of billionaires and giant multinational business corporations and banks. The spokesmodel politician like Barack Obama or Paul Ryan has replaced the power-hungry or status-hungry politician of yore, who carefully balanced opposing interests to preserve his own role as broker or middle-man. These are not middle-men; these are front-men only. And, they need a good story to exhibit as entertainment to the rubes, and preferably one that does not involve substantive economic policy.

  14. nihil obstet

    A politician who gives you nice things (as Atrios would say) is pandering. The one who makes the “hard choices” is the statesman that you should admire. This principle was important in getting us to where we are now, where voters who identify as virtuous or idealistic vote for perfectly horrible people doing perfectly horrible things. We need to keep saying that a politician who vows to make hard choices means that his choice is going to be really hard on you. Easy on him and his donors, though. The modern Democratic Party is simply amazing in its insistence that you shouldn’t expect anything from them.

    Voters used to expect payback for their votes. Immigrants took power by running political machines in the big cities, handing out jobs and services to voters in their wards. Farmers expected transportation infrastructure and market regulation for their products, and formed progressive parties if they didn’t get them from the two dominant parties. The Democratic Party controlled government for 40 years because of the jobs and services provided in the 1930s.

    The government still has lots of power, but it’s exercised in favor of money. The billionaires and corporations would have no power without a very active government supporting effective monopolies, making labor available, enforcing arcane financial arrangements, and the like. It’s only when ordinary people look for nice things that politicians suddenly become absolutely helpless. Poor Obama. He could stand between the pitchforks and Goldman Sachs, and he could be very good at killing, but on actual governing? No power at all. Just ask his supporters.

    “Impeach Trump” is a diversion. I don’t think it will happen, but if people start demanding nice things (and there are some signs that they’re beginning to do so), it will make a nice show to draw attention away from anything important.

  15. Chiron

    The Mueller investigation will stop (and has stopped) when reaches the real influencers in DC, and isn’t Moscow but Israel and the Saudis who copied the Zionist lobbying methods.

    There was a Neoliberal-Neocon alliance during the Trump first year in office trying to get rid of him with Mueller but this stopped after the Jerusalem Embassy move and the end of the Iran Deal, the hardcore Neocons are supporting Trump again with the exception of a few hurted egos that no ones listen to.

  16. Heliopause

    Latest Gallup poll has Trump’s approval amongst Republicans at 87%.

  17. Willy

    I wonder what Bill Kristol must be thinking about now. But then, who cares? Of more consequence, I wonder what former Bill Kristol disciples must be thinking. Do they blame “The Left” for his current wilderness experience?

  18. BlizzardOfOzzz

    Hugh, have you guys gotten around to the formality of making a single allegation yet? Against Trump or his campaign, I mean, in clear English and without linking to a Lousie Mensch 237-tweet rabbit hole. After 2 years, I’m sure you’ve got something better than Trump firing corrupt poseur Comey, or your little parlor game of 6 degrees of Putin.

    To the rest of us it still looks like Trump’s single “crime” was defeating and humiliating the corrupt leadership of both parties. (Also, you might still be able to peel off enough Rs to impeach, but that would not be evidence that they’re not corrupt.)

  19. Hugh

    The most likely charges would be the following since there is already ample evidence in the public record for them:

    Obstruction of justice
    Conspiracy to obstruct justice
    Violation of campaign finance law by seeking and accepting prohibited foreign aid
    Violation of the emoluments clause
    Extortion/pay for play
    Money laundering

    And prospectively, perjury

    If Trump is ever deposed under oath or called to testify before a grand jury, we are talking multiple counts. Because the man can’t join two sentences together without contradicting himself at least once and lying in both.

    Of course, an impeachment indictment can go much further and into other areas. Subversion of the institutions of government, most notably Justice, State, EPA, Interior, and Education. Misuse of the pardoning power. Violation of the Presidential oath. Endangering the country. A general and pervasive pattern of dictatorial behavior. Dereliction of duty in and command responsibility for the deaths of 4,000 Americans in Puerto Rico in the aftermath of hurricane Maria.

    Do I expect any of this to have any impact on Trump supporters? Of course not. Now if this were Obama or a Democratic President, they would be screaming bloody murder. But what we have isn’t even crickets. It’s complete denial and full-throated support.

    I have often said that it will take about three years for most of these Trump supporters to become thoroughly sick of him. It will not be facts or arguments or evidence that will pursuade them to dump him. These have no effect on them, but simple fatigue.

    I also think it is funny that Comey, a Republican, put in the last nail in Hillary Clinton’s awful, nailed-filled campaign and helped elect Trump but only became a corrupt poseur when he declined to swear personal fealty to him. I think it is hilarious that law and order Republicans are willing to throw out the rule of law and all standards as long as it is their guy. Same thing with Republican deficit hawks. We can’t have anything nice because it would cost too much. It would increase the deficit. But a one or two trillion dollar tax cut for the rich and the corporations they own? No problem. This is the world we live in. We are facing deadly serious problems, even existential ones. And which is sadder? That we have this grotesque clown as President, not addressing them, making them infinitely worse, or that we have so many cheering on his idiocy and willing to run over the cliff for him, –because reality doesn’t matter to them and they have nothing to fear until they hit the ground. “Can’t tell me nuthin’ na-na-na…” SPLAT!

  20. V

    Impeachment would accomplish nothing; there is a dangerous continuity of the “government’s” policies, irrespective of which party sits in the oval office.
    9/11 seems to be the hallmark of that continuity…

  21. I’m trying to figure out why anyone wants Trump and/or Republicans gone. The stock market is at an all time high. Home prices are higher than they were in 2007, but this time we are told that’s a good thing. Interest rates are rising a little, but are still very low. Employment is at a seven year low and still dropping. Wages are starting to show signs of increasing. Higher minimum wages are passing everywhere. Women’s power is skyrocketing in politics, in the marketplace, and in the justice system – not just increasing, but rising like an Elon Musk Falcon 9 rocket. What’s not to like?

  22. Ché Pasa

    There are always options besides impeachment to remove someone from office who no longer serves the purpose for which s/he was installed.

    Impeachment does not require a criminal offense, but it has proved to be a problematical — actually inoperative — remedy for troublesome or recalcitrant presidents. That’s one reason why the current resurgence in interest seems off. It’s unlikely to happen. Rs won’t do it to Trump because of their tribal solidarity, but also because they’re getting so much from him.

    But Dems would be loathe to do it if they got the chance by taking the House. No, what is more likely than an impeachment of Trump is the impeachment of his successor — whoever that might be — for the non-criminal political offense of abuse of power for fouling up the autocratic ways of Trump.

    No matter what happens with regard to Trump’s reign — which could implode at any time — we’re not going back to some idealized pre-Trump version of the presidency. Not gonna happen. The standards and expectations of an autocrat/emperor president are now baked in. They were always implicit. Now they out front, and there’s no way back.

    The autocrat/emperor serves at the pleasure of forces and interests well outside the public will.

    We get to watch the show, that’s about all.

  23. Willy

    @ Bill H

    It was too easy to argue the very same thing back in ‘07. But then ‘08 happened. I’m uncertain about the tariffs issues, but I guess we’ll all be finding out what comes from all that. But you’re right, Republicans only care about themselves, today. As for the rest of it, fuckem. Their very own children? Fuck them too.

  24. Blissex

    «here really can still be people out there who believe in (gasp) rule of law.»

    And therefore the same people loudly and constantly campaigned to impeach and try in criminal courts GW Bush and BH Obama for boasting about running a vast network of kidnap, torture and murder squads, junta style, even if they are very popular with voters and campaign donors.

  25. Heliopause

    “Would impeaching Trump make any difference?”

    Since the vast majority of Trump’s real-world policies (as opposed to the process and personality issues that his opponents fixate on) are standard-issue GOP one must assume that President Pence would carry on with largely the same agenda.

    President Pence could conceivably make things worse by putting a more pleasant face on the same destructive policies. On the other hand, when things inevitably go wrong President Pence would get the blame and so would mainstream Republicans, as happened in 2006-08. Whether the latter is a good thing or not depends on whether the Democrats respond with the same corporatism, compromises, and half-measures that they did after the 06-08 crisis.

  26. Blissex

    «The government still has lots of power, but it’s exercised in favor of money. The billionaires and corporations would have no power without a very active government supporting effective monopolies, making labor available, enforcing arcane financial arrangements, and the like. It’s only when ordinary people look for nice things that politicians suddenly become absolutely helpless.»

    That’s a gigantic misunderstanding of politics in most anglo-american countries: the “ordinary people” who vote are absolutely delighted with the economic policy of the past decades because it has given them the “nice things” they really want: massive real estate capital gains.
    The “
    billionaires and corporations” have discovered decades ago that as long as their representatives and their government keep the prices of middle-class real estate booming the middle classes give them their vote as a blank-check.

  27. Blissex

    «Trump has been able to frame the Mueller investigation as partisan because of course it is.»

    It is not “partisan” in the sense of “party” but in the sense of “establishment”.

    «The Democrats had two choices on how to react to Clinton’s loss: recognize it as a rebuke of the status quo and embark on a far-reaching review of what the party stands for OR look for a scapegoat. It chose the second path,»

    Only the clintonite hard right. The rest of the party is also engaging in payback for D Trump’s long-standing “birtherism”, in particular with the ridiculous “parlor game of 6 degrees of Putin” as another commenter called it.

    «future consequences up to and including direct confrontation
    with a nuclear-armed “opponent” be damned.

    It was H Rodham-Clinton who promised she would order to shoot down any russian planes flying over Syria, and it is D Trump that has repeatedly called for peaceful negotiations.

  28. BlizzardOfOzzz

    Let me see if I can translate …

    Obstruction of justice
    Conspiracy to obstruct justice

    > fired wanker Comey (richly deserved)

    Violation of campaign finance law by seeking and accepting prohibited foreign aid

    > said “Russia, if you’re listening I hope you do have Hillary’s emails”. Humor is not the strong suit of TDS victims.

    Violation of the emoluments clause

    > ambassadors stayed in Trump’s hotels (clearly quid pro quo since Trump hasn’t started a nuclear war with Russia yet – the nerve!)

    Extortion/pay for play

    > sure … link me the Louise Mensch tweetstorm “guys my anonymous source is telling me Drumph is gonna die in jail for real this time [1/186]”

    Money laundering

    > don’t know what the allegation is here, but I’m sure it’s every bit as devastating as the others

    Subversion of the institutions of government, most notably Justice, State, EPA, Interior, and Education.

    > “doing stuff I disagree with” (you know that all those departments report to the chief executive)

    Misuse of the pardoning power.

    > Marc Rich would like a word

    Violation of the Presidential oath.

    > hilarious

    A general and pervasive pattern of dictatorial behavior.

    > Firing a direct report: dictator! Attempting to enforce immigration laws: what was that you were saying about the Presidential oath? He hasn’t even had a judge arrested yet or tried to pack the Supreme Court – just wait.

    Dereliction of duty in and command responsibility for the deaths of 4,000 Americans in Puerto Rico in the aftermath of hurricane Maria.

    > Is this a reference to the affirmative action hire in charge of FEMA?

    The only thing that offends me is the willful ignorance on display. You expect Republican reps to impeach their own party’s popular President over this miscellaneous shit flung against the wall to see what sticks – really! The guy is loved like no politician in my lifetime. And if they do impeach, you think it will be because of Muh Threat To Our Republic (!) It would of course be to get those sweet globalist emoluments after leaving office, or under the thumb of deep state kompromat (how am I doing with these shiny new words we’ve all learned?)

  29. Willy


    Others have claimed that Trump is an outsider who breaks through that glass ceiling. I say that Trumps continuous behaviors are so ethically challenged that another “outsider” may not be allowed to be voted into anything powerful for a very long while.

    (not to mention all the Republican policies…)

  30. Willy


    Cognitive bias. Trump had my attention, but lost me after I researched his “unpaid contractors” situation, and then he bragged about it. That’s all anybody needs to know about his true character and motives. Study up on inborn temperaments. In most cases, people do not, cannot, change their core natures. Trump is an extreme case. There is far more going on than “the end justifies the means”.

  31. NR

    “The guy is loved like no politician in my lifetime.”

    Trump has ticked up slightly recently, but the reality is that he was the least popular first-year president in many decades by quite a large margin.

  32. different clue

    @Bill H,

    You ask . . . “what’s not to like?” I may not be the best person to answer, given that I voted for Trump to keep the Evil Clinton out of office; and while I too would like Trump and the Republicans “gone”; I will endure the pain which Trump and the Republicans bring till we can make the Clintobots and the Obamabots “gone” FIRST. THEN . . . we can work on getting Trump and the Republicans gone.

    In the meantime, whats not to like? Well, the TrumpAdmin wants to “re-legalize” the privilege bussiness used to arrogate unto itself to put cancer gas in the air, cancer juice in the water and cancer dust on the food. That’s something not to like. Also, the TrumpAdmin seeks to force a greater use of thermal coal burning to make electricity, and in particular the TrumpAdmin supports destroying all possible land with mountaintop removal mining in order to get the one-shot dose of coal under all those mountaintops. Also, the TrumpAdmin wants to deepen America’s colonial bondage to China as displayed in efforts to sell even more corn, coal, oil, natgas, soybeans, etc. to China . . . making America even more into China’s Colony and making China even more into America’s Mother Country. That’s something not to like. ( But in all fairness, making America into a Chinese Colony is also Bushite, Clintonite, and Obamazoid policy as well, so Trump is merely assuring Continuity of Policy on that front).

    But anyway, there you go. Some things not to like.

  33. BlizzardOfOzzz

    Willy – it’s probably a fair point as far as it goes. I’m triggered by the dull dishonesty of the anti-Trump left. It reminds me of the saying – you usually have one reason, so if you list 20 different reasons, then it’s actually just a bunch of rationalizations.

    NR – I was referring to popularity with Actual-Americans.

  34. Hugh

    Drawn from various sources:

    35% of all US stocks are owned by foreign corporations and individuals.
    Of stocks owned by Americans, 84% are owned by the top 10%.
    53% of Americans own zero stocks, including retirement accounts.

    The stock market is a bubble of the rich by the rich for the rich. It is not the economy. It is especially not the economy where most Americans live.

    Housing prices are up some because investors not families have been buying them.

    The unemployment rate is based on an active job seeker definition and is reflective of an economy that no longer exists post 2008.

    From the BLS, in May, not seasonally adjusted, the private sector added 991,000 (net total nonfarm jobs added 943,000 with government job losses). This is an excellent number. Net year to date job creation has been better than 2016-2017 although still not quite as good as 2014 and 2015. Hours and and wages have been volatile. In May nominal average weekly take-home pay declined $11.52. In April (May figures not out yet), real (inflation adjusted) wages for the bottom 82% of workers showed a 0% change compared to April 2017.

    From the Fed’s recently released report on well-being of US households, 3 in 10 adults are now part of the “gig” economy. What this means is that jobs are being created but that many of them are shit jobs.

  35. NR

    Blizzard of Ozz: How do you define “Actual Americans?”

  36. Hugh

    Blizzard illustrates my point that there are none so blind as those who will not see. Reality has no impact on them. They are tied to an extravagantly blatantly over-the-top failed man. He has no solutions. He will not better their lives, unless they are in the top 5%. He is betraying them left, right, and down the middle, and they don’t care. Give them facts, and they invent stories to explain them away, blame someone else. They understand that something is profoundly wrong about the country. They want something better, but they are so turned around that they embrace and defend fiercely and often nonsensically precisely what is making things worse, not only for them but the rest of us.

  37. Willy

    But Hugh, there’s always the Good Ole Lawd! Judge Jeanine herself said that Trump is fulfilling biblical prophesy, after which the good ole apocalypse shall come.

    In related news, Judge Jeanine recently proclaimed Jeff Sessions to be the Most Dangerous Man In America – along with Comey a major part of the Deep State Conspiracy to git Trump. (Rumor has it she’s jockeying to be the one to replace Sessions.)

    I think that many Americans are suffering what I’d call ‘an epistemological crisis’. It’s my own little neologism, trying to describe where the faith muscles have gotten so overdeveloped that the rational muscles have wasted away. When reality doesn’t match up with beliefs, you get people (like in my family not anybody here of course) constantly and compulsively coming up with bizarre conspiracy theories about how the long dead Hillary, the invisible Deep State, and that dangblasted Hillary killer Comey are all trying to take down God’s own chosen one, President Donald Trump.

    I’ve offered a possible solution for these people, to find whatever it was that scientists did back in the day when most of them were religious. Some kind of balance between faith and rational muscles? But I’m beginning to fear that their rational muscles are so far gone that they cannot perform such an exercise anymore.

  38. Webstir

    Wow. To paraphrase Captain Willard in Apocolypse Now “The shit on this thread is piling up so fast you need wings to stay above it.”

    99% of what I just read in the thread is idle speculation. Are any of you actually following the legal gist of what is going down in the Mueller investigation? I have. It’s why I’m not around here much lately. I’ve been spending time over at Emptywheel, Sic Semper, Courthouse News, and Lawfare type sites. Trump is doomed and this country will split apart at the seams when his revelations are made … probably around the midterms.

    And I get it. People are baffled by all the he said she said. I’m a lawyer and struggle to keep up with Marcy’s analyses. Not to mention you now have the likes of Gowdy and Ryan throwing Trump under the bus because they’re leaving politics. They see the writing on the wall. When the rats start to flee … the ship is going down.

    Everyone do yourselves a favor and go check Marcy’s blog. Go back about 6 months in the archives or you’ll never have a chance of understanding the depth of corruption we’re really dealing with here. Impeachment … piffle. We’re sailing into uncharted waters here folks. And here … there be monsters.

  39. Webstir

    And …. whoa! When did you go back to trusting us to comment civilly Ian?

  40. Webstir

    Oh, and finally: whoever on this thread thinks that it matters if Meuller is fired is smoking some good stuff. It’s in both the New York and Federal court systems. Trump can’t fire the courts. The investigation will go on. Please, stop repeating talking points you read on Facebook but don’t have the smarts to verify yourself.

  41. Webstir

    Sorry, not done yet! Anybody read this gem:

    Anyone else realize the Roy Cohn connection? Trump is a chip off the ol’ block.

    … something about history repeating itself.

  42. Webstir

    You truly are uninformed. Please see my advice above. You’re just regurgitating talking points. Go do your homework if you want to be taken seriously. It’s all out there if you know (or care) where to look. And, that is, you have the ability to understand what you’re reading. And I say this not to be a dick. It’s hard to follow. There in lies the problem. Trump knows there’s a fool born every minute. He’s relying on it.

  43. BlizzardOfOzzz

    Webstir – if I understand, the argument that you, Hugh, and others are making is not that you disagree with Trump politically, but that he’s committing grievous crimes so bad that his own party should impeach him. In other words, if there was a President that aligned with you politically, but was doing these things Trump is allegedly doing, you would support his impeachment.

    To me this is just laughable. I’m trying to give you a chance to justify it — explain in clear, plain English what the crime(s) are. You can’t do it. All you can do is link to the magnum opus of some bloggers who have spun an elaborate web of conspiracy theories based on speculations and inferences from anonymous sources, which you admit that even you don’t understand.

    We could pick apart any of Hugh’s Eighteen Reasons Why Drumph Is Totally Finished This Time, but that’s not what he wants. Just be honest, you’re pissed that he pulled out of your beloved Paris Climate Accord BS.

  44. “Every recent attempt by the left to do the same in the Democratic party has failed.”

    Justice Democrats ( did well in the TX primary, but I’m not sure how they’ve fared since then. One thing seems clear, though – they’ve been stuck at around 50 candidates since February. I don’t know why, but this is not a good sign, as they’re supposed to be aiming for a “hostile takeover” of the Democratic Party, only sparing reliably progressive incumbents.

    If I had to guess, I’d guess that they’d been co-opted, and their turnover of leadership by their co-founders (Cenk Uygur and Kyle Kulinski) was engineered by mainstream Democratic operatives. However, that is just speculation. I expect that Jimmy Dore will eventually spill the beans on what is going on with them…

    If they could have made a dramatic difference in the current election cycle, they may well have woken up a large part of the Republican base to organize intelligently to get populist candidates elected in the next election cycle.

    Well, at least I can root for the Italians, and their populist left-right coalition. Maybe they will prove more of a spark, eventually, for recalcitrant Americans to get a clue.

  45. Willy

    I’m trying to give you a chance to justify it — explain in clear, plain English what the crime(s) are. You can’t do it.

    He already did. And you refuted with information that (?) came from ‘credible’ sources? You once told me that places like Politifact and Snopes are not to be trusted. So who do you trust?
    Where do you get these strong opinions from?

  46. I have just posted, on the /r/justicedemocrats sub-reddit, the following question: “What have the Justice Democrats only fielded about 50 candidates instead of 100’s?” (I meant to write “Why …”)


  47. different clue

    About some judge wanting Sessions gone, Sessions has strong support in the Senate. He was the first Senator to endorse early-primary-runner Trump. He left the Senate to become Trump’s A. G.
    When Trump first seemed to be threatening to fire Sessions, McConnell and the other Senators said they would not even schedule hearings on a replacement for Sessions if Trump were to fire Sessions.

    Unless McConnell and the Senators have withdrawn that pledge more recently, that pledge still stands. The Senators understand loyalty to a fellow Senator who gave up a lot ( his Senate seat) to support Trump early. The Senators understand loyalty. Trump doesn’t even know what loyalty is.
    But Trump knows the Senate will back Sessions against Trump in a Mortal Kombat cage match to the death.

  48. Webstir

    Now I get your screen name. You’re entire argumentation strategy revolves around building strawmen. Without them, what’s your argument? All I said is that the facts as I see them (and many others on intelligent sites like emptywheel that are scrutinizing every single filing) doom Trump. Also, I said that the bombshell that’s coming will make discussion of impeachment seem cute.

    Go on over to emptywheel and post your opinions in the comments. Come on man. I dare ya. I’m over there a lot so I’ll see if you take me up on it. I’m sure Raine or bmaz will be perfectly happy to square away your ill conceived ideas.
    Myself? I work for a living and so don’t have the time to endlessly comment on blogs like all the retirees that seem to populate these threads.

  49. Webstir

    Just took a trip over there. It appears your post has been removed.

  50. Webstir

    And also Blizzard: No, I would never support a president whose foremost strategy is quasi-McCarthyism. You read the link I posted from lobelog? Good ol’ Roy Cohn. Kind of like a case of the crabs, that guy.

  51. Willy

    The Senators understand loyalty. Trump doesn’t even know what loyalty is.
    But Trump knows the Senate will back Sessions against Trump in a Mortal Kombat cage match to the death.</i.

    Not refuting, just adding a variable which should also be considered.

    Given that at least half of all US Senators go on to become lobbyists, often for corporate interests and earning far more money than they ever did as public servants, I’d think that discussions of senatorial loyalty might have to include that reality. Based on current DC swampiness, Trump no doubt understands that kind of loyalty which might explain (at least in part) the unusual loyalty he’s getting from otherwise “principled” senators. The former anti-drug senator John Boehner does after all, pretty much peddle dope these days.

  52. Willy

    Whoops. Slow down speedy. Close that tag.

  53. Willy

    The Senators understand loyalty. Trump doesn’t even know what loyalty is.
    But Trump knows the Senate will back Sessions against Trump in a Mortal Kombat cage match to the death..

    Not refuting, just adding a variable which should also be considered.
    Given that at least half of all US Senators go on to become lobbyists, often for corporate interests and earning far more money than they ever did as public servants, I’d think that discussions of senatorial loyalty might have to include that reality. Based on current DC swampiness, Trump no doubt understands that kind of loyalty which might explain (at least in part) the unusual loyalty he’s getting from otherwise “principled” senators. The former anti-drug senator John Boehner does after all, pretty much peddle dope these days.

    Sorry about the mess. Cleanup on aisle “why-republicans-are-unlikely-to-impeach…”

  54. BlizzardOfOzzz

    Willy – there’s nothing to refute, that’s my whole point. Impeachment is political: that means you (your side I mean) have to persuade ordinary people who are skeptical of your case. And you can’t do it. All you’ve got is a bunch of vague hand-waving like Hugh’s post. Or like Webstir, you link to a magnum opus of ten-thousand word essays spinning sandcastles out of hot air and promising that bombshell will drop any day now. And then when it predictably fails to persuade anyone, you throw a tantrum.

  55. BlizzardOfOzzz

    Webstir – if the bombshell is coming (any day, now) then I guess we’ll just wait and see. There’s no point arguing over whether a hypothetical bombshell is coming. I just don’t know how you can be so naive when you’re seeing guys like Clapper and Brennan go on MSNBC. These are guys who were at the top leadership of US intelligence, supposed to be apolitical, going on TV to attack the President. They’re doing everything short of donning a pussyhat to tell you they’re political operatives.

  56. BlizzardOfOzzz


    Blizzard of Ozz: How do you define “Actual Americans?”

    Here you go:

    Since FDR, most popular with his own party than anyone except post-9/11 GWB.

    Granted there are also Actual-Americans in the D party. but the number decreases every day.

  57. NR

    Blizzard of Ozz:

    So you define “Actual Americans” as “Republicans” (and apparently some small number of Democrats). Well of course if you only consider a group that is made up mostly of Republicans, a Republican president is going to be popular. But Republicans are not the whole country, and the fact remains that Trump is very unpopular in the country as a whole.

  58. Willy

    Pretty lame BOO. You won’t quote any sources?

    Mueller’s team is keeping their most valuable cards close to their chest, as do all competent lawyers, until it’s time. From amongst Trumps compadres we already have 5 guilty pleas and 17 indictments. But the day will arrive when the Trump cards are shown.

    In the meantime, if an honest researcher Googles: “Trump+corruption” they’ll receive more than twice the number of hits as “Obama+corruption” (a topic that’s even discussed here), for a president who’s had 6 times the amount of time as our current one has had to do naughty things.

    Apparently, like all the media (cept the kind serving Real Americans), Google and the internet are liberal.

  59. Blissex

    «spun an elaborate web of conspiracy theories based on speculations and inferences from anonymous sources»

    Payback for many years of Trump’s “birtherism”, while nobody seems to care that all three of GW Bush, BH Obama, D Trump have all boasted publicly having regular meetings in which they order the kidnap, torture or murder of hundreds of people a year by junta-style CIA/DoD death squads.

  60. Blissex

    «Based on current DC swampiness, Trump no doubt understands that kind of loyalty which might explain (at least in part) the unusual loyalty he’s getting from otherwise “principled” senators.»

    It appears that D Trump for many years the single biggest political campaign donor, bigger even than the Koch brothers. Unsurprisingly, for a tax-dodging real-estate tycoon buying influence is even more important than for oil billionaires…
    “Across America, top political donors include Donald Trump, Sheldon Adelson, and Linda McMahon.”

    While idiots elaborate fantasy theories about the donations *to* D Trump.

  61. Blissex

    «for a tax-dodging real-estate tycoon buying influence»

    Put another way, I am amazed by the dishonesty or imbecility of the clintonite fake-Democrats who “spun an elaborate web of conspiracy theories based on speculations and inferences from anonymous sources” or make up a “little parlor game of 6 degrees of Putin” as so well writes “BlizzardOfOzzz”.

    Because D Trump is a real estate developer in NYC, NJ etc., and that means that is Briber-In-Chief: he has probably paid off everybody, politicians, the mob, regulators, trade unions chiefs; real estate developers in NYC and NJ bribe people almost out of habit, especially after several decades in the business.

    The ludicrous buffoons who invoke the Emoluments Clause over foreign diplomats paying bills in Trump hotels, or over a few dozen thousands in suppporting facebook ads seems to me either immensely stupid or knowing disinformers, as the last thing that a NYC/NJ property developer like D Trump can be imagined to be is being bribed rather than bribing.

    Why don’t the clintonite fake-Democrats raise the issue of D Trump as a briber? Because NYC and NJ are democratic-machine states, and I am sure that while D Trump’s political donations have gone mostly to Republicans (to cover the tax dodging angle) virtually all his bribing has benefited clintonite fake-Democrats.

    Hey usians! You elect a NYC/NJ property tycoon to the presidence, you elect someone you can be sure has hugely corrupted politics with donations and bribes to anybody they could suborn. That was your choice…

  62. @Webstir

    Thanks for pointing that out. If I’m logged in to reddit, hitting that link brings me to my original post. So, I’ve been shadow banned, as I never received any message that my comment is now hidden from others.

    For the record, here if my ‘offensive’ comment, which so worries whoever is running /r/justicedemocrats (or possibly I was shadow banned by somebody within reddit, not a member of the subreddit ??)

    “Shouldn’t a “hostile takeover” of the Democratic Party have fielded at least 400 candidates for the House of Representatives, alone? Going by the Justice Democrats website, there’s been almost no change in the number of candidates since February.”

    Such behavior is consistent with Demcratic operatives co-opting Justice Democrats. Not good…..

    BTW, I recently had a comment that I made in breitbart, using disqus, removed. I was at least told that it seemed to be spam. Here is my spammy comment:

    “You’re quite welcome.
    A couple of other avenues to explore, regarding what you could call the “Deep State”, and the “Deep Financial State”.

    By the latter, I’m referring to the Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports, which are legally required documents that give a more accurate account of ASSETS held, and co-held, by governments at local, county, state and federal government. I recently found out that they’re also required of universities, which I’ve come to view as uber corrupt businesses. The budgets you see published in newspapers are more like operating budgets.
    Although copies of CAFR’s were being sent to the media and Congress critters, they’re basically censored from mainstream media, to this day. (You can prove this to yourself by googling: “Comprehensive Annual Financial Report”
    or CAFR

    You’ll get about 9 hits, most comments or having to do with an article about CAFR being cleverly brought into a court case.

    According to Walter Burien, who “discovered” these in the mid-90’s, they have (liquid?) assets of about $200 TRILLION. So much that we don’t need an income tax, and could retire a federal deficit of 20 Trillion with lots of cash left over.

    I spoke to Burien recently. His contact info is on his website: He’s an ‘exile’ from NJ, living in AZ, and probably has lots of knowledge of the CA situation. Don’t be misled by the primitive appearance of his website – there’s a negative correlation between it’s spiffiness and the blockbuster information that he’s uncovered. He also recommended as a reference, though it’s a few years outdated, as the principal has died.

    Now, my other reference to “Deep State” is via the definition given by the American Intelligence Media folks (who I don’t trust completely, frankly). They use this term not like Peter Dale Scott, who termed it, but rather to refer to an “army” of unelected, unfirable beaureaucrats, who generally sit above the regular civil service employees, and are UNVETTED by the same procedure that they are required to undergo. Their real function is to make sure that their corporate ‘sponsors’ do their will, regardless of what the elected Congress critters may desire.

    This is ‘legal’ because of a big $$ misuse of a reform that goes back to the Carter Administration, in the form of the creation of the senior executive service.

    These folks have uncovered documents that prove that Obama and Jeff Session were SES. (Not a good thing….)

    Besides their youtube channel (American Intelligence Media), see and

    BTW, one reason I don’t trust these people completely is because I’ve made efforts to alert them as to the CAFR’s, but they seem strangely uninterested. Even though CAFR assets far outstrip the sums of money that they tend to talk about. The chief guy, named Peter Gabriel (I think), talks as though Trump has a magic wand, and seems completely uninterested in political organizing. But, even if they are a disinfo outfit, good disinfo is mostly true, and they seem to ferreting out major scandals which are not talked about in the media.”

  63. BlizzardOfOzzz


    Mueller’s team is keeping their most valuable cards close to their chest, as do all competent lawyers, until it’s time.

    And there they are again, those much-alluded to bombshell revelations that are sure to drop any day now. There’s no arguing with those. What’s wrong with Republicans, why won’t they line up to impeach their own President over these phantom crimes that are sure to be revealed real soon now, by the Soviet-style prosecutor who has his suspect identified first and then goes looking for crimes, and where the focus ends up being on crimes coming out of the process itself (obstruction, lying to the FBI) and not the things that were supposedly being investigated? What’s wrong with Republicans? Smh – must just have poor ethics, yeah, must be it.


    Payback for many years of Trump’s “birtherism”

    Fair comment, but I’ll just note that you’re implicitly admitting that it is in fact a witch-hunt.

  64. Willy

    Google Ralph Peters. Watch the videos – should be minimal work for you. He’ll speak for me.

    I’d rather ‘debate’ against a cult Scientologist.

  65. Webstir

    Where is your response to Ryan and Gowdy that I pointed out earlier, which you conveniently glossed over while building your strawman? Both are in the record saying Trump’s accusations about the FBI are buncombe. Both no longer give a shit b/c they’re not running again. Both are savvy politicians with inside information given their positions. Like I said, rats fleeing a sinking ship.

  66. Webstir

    I’ll check those cafr links. As someone who has litigated against local and state gov’s it may come in handy some day.

  67. @Webstir Please do.

    BTW Burien was easy to reach (by calling). His telephone number is on his website.

  68. BlizzardOfOzzz

    Willy – looked him up. “The Steel Dossier just rings true to me.” This is the dossier that Comey called “salacious and unverified”, that not even fake news CNN could print until they had a “news hook” which is why limp-wristed Comey briefed Trump on it.

    Webstir – Paul Ryan? You can’t possibly be serious. This is your authority? You do realize that he is owned by his donors and that he never supported Trump even when he had won the nomination? Gowdy is controlled opposition – just look at that face, the blackmail tape on him must be an all-timer.

  69. Willy

    In one comment you said that Comey’s firing was “richly deserved”. Then in this very same thread you suddenly claim he’s to be taken as equally seriously as a once-respected Fox News regular? Hint: few around here take Comey(R) comments without a grain of salt. So much for that weak diversion.

    Anyways, isn’t Peters’ calling Fox a “destructive propaganda machine” proof that the all-powerful “fake news” is in league with Satan?

  70. Hugh

    Pardons are coming up in Trump’s attacks on Mueller and they likely will be an issue in any future impeachment, a few observations are in order. First, the President’s power is not absolute. For instance, a President can pardon criminal contempt (Joe Arpaio) but not civil contempt because any remedy in civil contempt is not considered a punishment. And of course, the pardoning power applies only at the federal, not the state level. Second, misuse of the pardoning power can itself become an article in an impeachment, much as Nixon’s refusal to obey Congressional subpoenas in its investigation of him became an article. Third, an individual pardon as opposed to a commutation or an amnesty must be accepted to become effective. Fourth, and most importantly, a pardon signifies an admission of guilt for the crime being pardoned. In this regard, Trump’s remark about pardoning Muhammad Ali was weird and came across as pandering to African Americans. There was no crime to be pardoned. The Supreme Court in a unanimous decision threw out Ali’s conviction in 1971. And even if there had been, it was amnestied by Carter in 1977. So it wasn’t much of a surprise that Ali’s lawyer on behalf of his family basically said thanks but no thanks.

  71. Willy

    Self-pardon by reason of dementia?

  72. BlizzardOfOzzz

    Willy –

    Comey’s comments stand as an admission against interest, since he may as well have protested at the Capitol clad in a pussyhat like his wife and daughters. I don’t know anything about Ralph Peters but his “I believe the Pee-Pee dossier because it rings true and just sounds like how Russian intelligence operates” is not an argument.

  73. BlizzardOfOzzz

    Hugh, attempting to pardon a state crime would indeed be an abuse. I would congratulate you on your first direct hit, except that it doesn’t have the virtue of actually having occurred … oh well …

  74. Hugh

    So let’s see just in the last few days we have seen Trump in an unhinged exchange with reporters where his bombast and ignorance were on graphic display. On the one hand, idiotically talking about giving Ali a celebrity pardon for something he did not need a pardon for. And then declaring that he did not need to do any preparation for a meeting with Kim Jong-un who poses a serious nuclear threat to the US that must be dealt with, because he has been “preparing for this all his life” which is about as reassuring as the drunk at the end of the bar, whom Trump in so many ways resembles, saying he’s going to perform brain surgery on someone you care about, not because he knows anything about surgery or the brain but because he has been “preparing for this all his life.”

    Then he goes to Canada and throws a temper tantrum like a badly behaved 6 year old. There is certainly a case to be made for repatriating jobs back to the US but he didn’t make it and the G-7 are far from the major culprits involved. Those really responsible are Wall Street, US corporations, the free traders in Congress, and of course countries like China. But bizarrely and as usual for this President at the same time he is lashing out at countries we have close ties with, his Administration was working out a way to save a really bad actor in ZTE and a bunch of Chinese jobs.

    Then he flies off to Singapore for his meeting with Kim. Trump has unloaded numerous times on previous Administrations for their failure to confront Kim and deal with North Korea. And sure they can be blamed for kicking the can down the road but at the time the North Korean nuclear problem was not as advanced as it currently is. So now under Trump North Korea seems to have made significant advances, but after initially taking a hard line against Kim, in the run-up to the Singapore talks, Trump has toned down expectations and essentially embraced the process of his predecessors. In other words, he too is kicking the can down the road.

    You can pretty much sum up the Trump Presidency as making the rich a lot richer, kicking down allies, kissing up to dictators, acting like a child and blowing things up at random, and lying and using superlatives constantly. Does any of this make America great again? Bring back American jobs? Help ordinary Americans? No. Is Trump a danger to the country? Yes. His words and actions provide fertile grounds for impeachment, but our political classes of both parties are corrupt and stand for nothing but their own interests, a trait they share with this President.

  75. Webstir

    Read this?

    You’re on the right track as to those responsible. I definitely learned something …

  76. BlizzardOfOzzz

    Hugh’s impeachment case has been whittled down to “don’t like the way he talks” and “got further on NK diplomacy than any President, but might screw it up now”. That’s not quite Kathy Griffin or Samantha Bee levels of persuasion, but it’s getting there.

  77. Webstir

    I’m tellin’ ya’ Bliz, hop on over to emptywheel, get comfy, pour yourself a drink, and start reading from about the time DT fired Comey. It will all become clear. Come on … you seem so confident. Whatcha got to lose? I’m pretty sure you’re retired and have nothing better to do anyway.

  78. Hugh

    You sort of wonder who is paying BlizzardofFogg for his non-stop, fact free trolling for Trump.

  79. BlizzardOfOzzz

    Webstir – I wouldn’t go down a rabbit hole like 9/11 trutherism or Trump-Putin conspiracies. Even if I had hundreds of hours to spare, that’s not how I would want to spend it.

    The thing about fundamental assumptions is that they can be totally arbitrary. If Marcy is 100% committed to the Trump-Putin conspiracy, then she can select and interpret every fact in that light. It’s the same principle that if a crazy man thinks he’s the King of England, how are you going to prove him wrong? You can’t.

  80. Willy

    Projection and cowardice.

    It’s easier to be a pathetic sycophant like Ted Cruz, than it is to be a George Will or Erick Erickson. It takes courage to be a real American.

  81. BlizzardOfOzzz

    Hugh – I think your side’s obsessive preening about “facts” is richly ironic. After all, it’s your side that tells us there is no objective reality, and that what we call truths are only socially constructed. So then what is a fact in your worldview? Obviously nothing but a decree of your Party (ie, the mass media). This also explains why your side’s “fact checks” don’t deal in facts but in deviations from Party dogma. And you somehow expect us to pay slavish obeisance to your conception of “facts” which is twisted to the point of inversion? Stick to the facts – if only!

  82. Webstir

    That’s just it Bliz. It’s not about what we’re fed in the mass media. It’s just good ol’ fashioned corruption. Mafia style. That’s all. If you’re cool with that, so be it. But don’t act like it isn’t there. It is. And the “there,” is one Paul Manafort.

    But, keep on whistling past the graveyard. Maybe all those ghosts will stay comfortably tucked in their graves. I doubt it. Which is why I’ve never believed in conspiracy theories. People love to hear themselves talk. And talk they are.

    So, that said, will you promise me as soon as all this goes down you won’t go awol from this blog? You’ll survive to eat crow another day. I promise.

  83. Willy

    After all, it’s your side that tells us there is no objective reality, and that what we call truths are only socially constructed.

    Source? I don’t know any progressives who talk that way. I only hear those kinds of accusations about “the other side” from those whose current dogma involves a lost faith in all human built institutions. It is a form of ad hominem. Without a credible source this is projection, yet again.

  84. BlizzardOfOzzz

    Webstir – you do realize Manafort is not in the Trump administration, right? And yes, we will see – speculation shouldn’t be taken too far, no one wants to become a loony conspiracy theorist like Marcy …

    Willy – you goofball, that is axiomatic on the left. Do I really need to guide you to the 6 million articles claiming that biological sex (a fact if there ever was one) is a social construct?

  85. BlizzardOfOzzz

    There was a famous “fact check” of a Republican who claimed that Obamacare would increase premiums. It was rated false, and why? Because Obama had claimed otherwise! Meanwhile, biological sex is not a fact. That is what “facts” are to the left, nothing more or less – the Party Line! You may as well own it.

  86. Willy

    There are also 6 million “liberal” articles claiming that while biological sex is not a social construct, discrimination is. By definition “liberal” means ‘open to new ideas’. Personally, I prefer proven, existing ideas, and categorize the rest as either unproven, or TBD by things like debate, peer review, and actual test. Ideally, the debate should be over which new ideas have merit, and not the sideshow circus of a POTUS who has clearly obvious corrupt behavior patterns.

    Speaking of Log Cabin Republicans, I was once ‘debating’ with a conservative about the risks of a Trump presidency, when he increasing started calling me homosexual derogatory. We’d never discussed anything of the sort. He just started doing it. His own latency or prejudice I dunno, but the topic of that discussion had been the veracity and intelligence of his fellow St. Louis buddy, Jim Hoft, who he claimed to know personally.

    The very next day Jim Hoft came out as gay. I had a pretty good laugh over that one.

  87. BlizzardOfOzzz

    This stuff about corruption – you don’t even know what you’re talking about. Corruption means you get rich from abusing the power of your office for personal wealth (like Bill and Hillary Clinton, Obama and Bernie Sanders). Trump was already wealthy when he ran for office.

    Your political tribe opposes Trump because he’s a symbol and champion of normal white America.
    Your tribe has lost its collective mind because its elite and grassroots increasingly consist of rootless globalists and foreigners, nihilists, pedophiles, and other sexual deviants. That’s why your friend called you a homosexual derogatory — because it perfectly captures what your political tribe has become. The root is denial of Logos (divine reason in the cosmos), but it manifests as all sorts of deranged behavior, most visibly in widespread, loud and proud, deviant sexual hedonism.

  88. Willy

    “your political tribe”

    I don’t have a tribe which should be obvious over dozens of my posts over the past year. Anybody left reading may want to consider why BOO is compelled to box people into “our” and “the other” tribal categories, as well as why the millions circling the drain with Trump are only hardening their positions while saner conservatives continue to peel away from that mass.

  89. NR


    Cut Blizzard some slack. You’d probably be in a similar state if you had to invest your hopes and dreams for the country into a sleazeball like Donald Trump.

  90. BlizzardOfOzzz

    An expression of tribalism is believing something totally irrational just because it’s what your tribe demands. The “men have wombs too, bigot” is a good one just because it might be the most hilariously retarded tribal shibboleth of all-time. But the Trump-Russia conspiracy theory is not too far behind.

  91. Willy

    One of the biggest fears for a tribalist is being shunned by the tribe. Google “kim jong il funeral” and pick a video to watch to see how loony tribalism can get.

    But there is something worse than being shunned for the sin of going against the tribe. It is being shunned after having done nothing wrong. Been there, as I’ve described many times before.

    I learned the hard way that it’s far safer to think independently (while prudently pretending to be crying for “dear leader”) than it is to believe the tribe will keep you safe at all times.

  92. Willy

    Cut Blizzard some slack. You’d probably be in a similar state if you had to invest your hopes and dreams for the country into a sleazeball like Donald Trump.

    Actually, I’ve been in that situation, and got badly burned even after praising dear leadership. This is why it’s so very important to be able to discern the motives and temperament of anybody who has power over you. There are people out there who may enjoy ruining you life for pure sport, for the pleasure they gain from the exercise of power. More paranoid others may erase you if they so much as hear a rumor. Tribe is irrelevant, as many rotten leaders will choose their tribe for best chances of obtaining and maintaining power.

    I was just like BOO once, all conservative and evangelical. Yet… Jesus didn’t fly down and save me no matter how hard I prayed, no matter how righteous I knew my cause was.

  93. Altandmain

    As Nathan Robinson writes, running Bernie Sanders is the best way to get rid of Trump.

    The issue is that the Democratic Party will likely deliberately sabotage Sanders, both during a hypothetical 2020 Primary and should Sanders win, they will sabotage their own party.

    One reason why I read Current Affairs (although I don’t agree with every article) is because he was one of the few places that called Trump.

    He joins Glenn Greenwald in being right.

    I highly recommend you read those articles and looking back in 2018 – consider how they were attacked in the media, just like how universal healthcare still is attacked in the American media.

    Universal healthcare is an area where a state owned system, although far from perfect, significantly outperforms a free market system.

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén