The thing is that the divide will get even more deep. — ssu

Eh. If US was attacked, we'd all fall in like we've always been best friends willing to die for whatever. In the meantime, it looks like we're about to kill each other (or at least refuse to shake one another's hands).

Like I said, your entire argument was premised on the fantasies of the House and the admitted presumptions of one testimony. You didn’t show Trump’s behavior violated “government ethics standards”. You showed how Biden violated them. — NOS4A2

Labeling the House's inferences "fantasies" demonstrates your pre-judgment. There was much more than one bit of testimony, so you obviously just didn't pay attention. Lack of attention also explains why you didn't pick up on there being an appearance of conflict of interest by Trump on his Zelensky call, and this would call for a closer look at the surrounding facts. Instead of being forthcoming with those facts, he stonewalled the collection of facts. Contrast this with Biden, which I acknowledge has the appearance of conflict, but a closer look at the facts does not support it. And with Trump, it's more than a conflict of interest - he was violating his oath of office and due process by asking for an INDIVIDUAL to be investigated; due process directs investigation of crimes, not fishing expeditions of people. You ignore all this, because you like the spectacle of political dirt digging, and seem to have a quasi-religious faith in Trump's virtues.

Maybe you believe that you’re conducting some sort of social science study? as misguided as that would be.

The blindness? There's corruption everywhere. If you truly believe Trump is interested in investigating corruption, you're completely blind. He was looking for dirt on an opponent. Period.

Is Hunter Biden corrupt? I'm sure of it. But that wasn't my point. See the blindness.

OK, I've already begun preparing for another 4 years of this guy.

*happy thoughts*

Romney is wrong for the same reason the impeachment brigade is wrong. It’s as simple as that really. It’s hatred and envy.

Labeling the House's inferences "fantasies" demonstrates your pre-judgment. There was much more than one bit of testimony, so you obviously just didn't pay attention. Lack of attention also explains why you didn't pick up on there being an appearance of conflict of interest by Trump on his Zelensky call, and this would call for a closer look at the surrounding facts. Instead of being forthcoming with those facts, he stonewalled the collection of facts. Contrast this with Biden, which I acknowledge has the appearance of conflict, but a closer look at the facts does not support it. And with Trump, it's more than a conflict of interest - he was violating his oath of office and due process by asking for an INDIVIDUAL to be investigated; due process directs investigation of crimes, not fishing expeditions of people. You ignore all this, because you like the spectacle of political dirt digging, and seem to have a quasi-religious faith in Trump's virtues.

I’ve read every testimony except for the one the house hid. And simply repeating the accusations of the House without any reference to the defense does not convince me.

I’ve read every testimony except for the one the house hid. And simply repeating the accusations of the House without any reference to the defense does not convince — NOS4A2

Of course you're not convinced. Faith is never defeated with facts.

We previously discussed the evidence you considered exculpatory, and I showed how it's consistent with Trump's guilt and therefore not exculpatory.

What Trump said after the Senate acquittal:

Now that the Senate has fulfilled its constitutional responsibility, bringing this process to a conclusion, I want to say again to the American people how profoundly sorry I am for what I said and did to trigger these events and the great burden they have imposed on the Congress and on the American people.

I also am humbled and very grateful for the support and the prayers I have received from millions of Americans over this past year.

Now I ask all Americans, and I hope all Americans, here in Washington and throughout our land, will rededicate ourselves to the work of serving our nation and building our future together.

This can be and this must be a time of reconciliation and renewal for America. Thank you very much.

NO - wait. That was Clinton.

Trump is guilty. I hope he rots in jail after his presidency is up. Whether he'll be prosecuted then remains to be seen but I would consider it a great career move as a prosecutor. After all, id the Bidens should've been investigated based on fantasies according to the resident troll/shill, surely Trump warrants one based on facts.

there are no facts in Trumpworld.

I'm not in Trumpworld.

Romney is wrong for the same reason the impeachment brigade is wrong. It’s as simple as that really. It’s hatred and envy. — NOS4A2

It seems like everything is just hatred and envy for you. That's the point. Trump supporters yell "Trump derangement syndrome!" for any and every critical view "hurled" (by their view) against their cherished POTUS. It's all one huge conspiracy.

But I get. A lot of Americans are this way. If one would have dared to criticize Obama's War-on-Terror tactics and dared to point out it was quite the same as Bush had it, there would be many Americans coming to the defence their beloved President. They would just blame the Republicans or simply ignore the facts. Many of those complaining how the War-on-Terror approaches go against what the US stands for where quite silent when Obama took office, even if much didn't change.

The incapability of any kind of objective criticism of the President or the party you actually support and/or have voted comes I guess from the vitriolic hatred of the opposing party.

Its like the Brexiters over here. They are basically going Grrh ahh Grrh ahh sovereignty, Grrh ahh Grrh ahh reclaim our borders. Anyone who questions it is some sort of traitor to our great nation, or can't bare to loose, remoners.

It's happening everywhere, there is a great documentary on the BBC at the moment, where Ed Balls, a well respected politician, travels around Europe talking to populists. In every country the message is the same. The established party's have taken their eye off the ball and large parts of the population feel left behind. So a populist party comes along and promises to put right their grievances. To make their country great again. Millions of people then vote for them, not thinking about what is really going on. That an opportunist, or an extreme right, or left party is saying whatever is required to win their vote, simply to get into power. Once they get into power, the promises are discarded and they follow their own agenda. Usually they will throw some scraps of short term prosperity to the masses by cutting taxes, or protectionism. Or fuel nationalism by blaming someone over there for their troubles, or divide the nation against itself, to create chaos, or blind partisanship.

In every case it results in political and national division making the world a more unstable and dangerous place.

And when the shit hits the fan, whose fault is it? It's them over there, those corrupt politicians, or those people who don't love their country.

These populist leaders should show more respect for the people and their nations and rule with responsibility, integrity, seeking cohesion between groups, rather than division. Their irresponsibility could cause a fall of civilisation and mass suffering.

And what is really to blame, bankers playing Russian ruollete with sub prime mortgages. Maybe the populists should be putting the bankers in jail.

I wonder why. In the lead up to Trump’s presidency the political class promised us the next Hitler, recessions, race wars, mushroom clouds, Russian tanks rolling down our streets. Anyone who voted opposite to them are racist, know-nothing xenophobes. So where was your “objective criticism” then?

It all turned out to be the live-action roleplaying of globalists and their priggish EU allies, the last-ditch efforts to maintain power as they watch their bloated bureaucratic enterprises sink beneath their own hubris. They would undo democracy itself to live out these fantasies, to continue pretending they are the resistance to some growing evil.

As is predictable “objective criticism” is reserved for the opponent only. Zero praise, zero optimism. zero acknowledgement of anything beneficial will come from you, because it would contradict the world-view so many have bought into and invested in.

Besides, any “objective criticism” is immediately overshadowed by thought policing, political correctness, identity politics and wild conspiracy theories. A lot of euros are like this, it turns out, seemingly emulating their American counterparts.

That's all nonsense, what has happened is some stagnation and austerity following the sub-prime mortgage crash, coming on top of the economic consequences of globalisation. People feeling the pain of the stagnation, are vulnerable to the false promises of opportunists and populists, to restore life to how it was before. It's happening all around the world, but the promises are hollow.

Joe Walsh: Challenging Trump for the GOP nomination taught me my party is a cult

I asked dozens of people a very simple, straightforward question: “Has President Trump ever told a lie to the American people?” And every single person said, “No.” Never mind that thousands of his misstatements have been meticulously documented. No, they said, he’s never lied.

I brought up his years-old claims that, unlike President Barack Obama, if Trump ever became president, he’d be too busy to play golf. Most people responded by saying they don’t care whether Trump golfs. But three people said that Trump has never golfed since he’s been president. No one said that they thought he did anything wrong with Ukraine. No one knew that our annual deficits just blew past $1 trillion. Everyone believed hundreds of miles of new wall had been built. (Fact check: False!) When I asked whether they thought Mexico was paying for the wall, most people said yes but were at a loss to explain how. On and on it went: CNN was the enemy and Rep. Adam B. Schiff (Calif.), along with the rest of the congressional Democrats, were lying traitors.

I also phone-banked this week, calling potential Republican caucus-goers throughout Iowa. I always knew it when I got a strong Trump supporter on the line by the language they used and the tone that they took: They’d say no president has been attacked like Trump has or no president has had to deal with such hatred and opposition. (Again: Not true!) They’d get defensive and throw out more lies and half-truths: China is paying for the tariffs, Joe Biden was covering up for his son, and Russia didn’t do anything in the 2016 election were all popular. On and on it went: I ended my two hours of phone time each day pretty bummed out by the mis- and disinformation I’d heard.

...

I realized once and for all that nobody can beat Trump in a Republican primary. Not just because it’s become his party, but because it has become a cult, and he’s a cult leader. He doesn’t have supporters; he has followers. And in their eyes, he can do no wrong.

They’re being spoon-fed a daily dose of B.S. from “conservative” media. They don’t know what the truth is and — more importantly — they don’t care. There’s nothing that any Republican challenger can do to break them out of this spell. (Thanks, Hannity.)

the political class — NOS4A2

The political class? What does that mean?

At any rate there's no doubt American politics has been ushered into a dizzying anti-intellectualist new age by Trump's alt-fact-loving cultists.

That happened before already. Bush Jr. goofball act was the prelude.

It's funny to see right wingers play victim, like Trump did again. It's pc in reverse but with the effect of doing what they claim pc did (while in fact pc created the space for the ridiculed and discriminated to find their voice).

Every time someone critises Trump? They're all haters, witch hunters, liars, etc. That's just another way of saying that people who disagree with Trump's policies or deem him unfit for office should shut up : that is exactly what right wimgers' gripe about pc is about. Meanwhile, right wing memes and thoughts in fact get more air time than any other segment of the political compass because they whine "I'm not heard, I'm not heard" and the media actually takes it seriously.

The right's entire whining about pc is just that, an incessant, petulant wail of a child that has been heard but deemed not to offer anything worthwhile. We can all ignore the fascism and populism as serious thought and the discussion for people still in full command of reason should be a strategic one : how to offer a viable alternative that actually creates a better world and get people to vote for it.

That happened before already. Bush Jr. goofball act was the prelude. — Benkei

No US President is innocent of lying. But Tump's lies are in a league of their own.

The Power Lie: He knows he's lying and we know he's lying and he knows we know he's lying.

The inauguration-crowd-size lie set the tone. It said: Deny the evidence of your eyes. Trump will tell you what's true.

That's something new in US political folly.

The erection of an alt-fact simulacrum is something new.

I wonder why. In the lead up to Trump’s presidency the political class promised us the next Hitler, recessions, race wars, mushroom clouds, Russian tanks rolling down our streets. Anyone who voted opposite to them are racist, know-nothing xenophobes. So where was your “objective criticism” then? — NOS4A2

Russian tanks rolling down your streets? Seriously, NOS4A2? Russian tanks?

Please give the reference to Russian tanks rolling down your streets. Just for starters.

No, this is just of the example of the hype up vitriolic fervor typical to the 2016 election and the utter incapability of seeing things from another viewpoint. Oh, how badly Trump is been treated? Ok, how about then Hillary Clinton? Or Bill Clinton before? Remember an impeachment? How long did those hearings for Benghazi go on? How long did those investigations about the emails go on? What was that chant again the Trump crowd was so eager to chant? And of course, that the FBI gave the Trump the October surprise by opening the investigations again hardly matters, because they did their job of which they are supposed to do, check if foreign intelligence services are active on US soil. (You see, the FBI really goes quite impartially against both sides of the political spectrum: far right militias, far left organizations, radical green movements etc.)

As is predictable “objective criticism” is reserved for the opponent only. Zero praise, zero optimism. zero acknowledgement of anything beneficial will come from you, because it would contradict the world-view so many have bought into and invested in. — NOS4A2

Then you simply don't actually read what I write.

I've always said that Trump made great choices by picking up non-political US generals into key positions at first (Mattis as Secretary for Defence, Kelly as Secretary of Homeland Security, McMaster as National Security Advisor). That really took the "Foreign Policy blob" politicians, especially the neocons, out of the loop for a while. Of course now they are all out. I've never though Trump would start any serious conflict. Men with missions start wars. Trump's not that kind of person, who has a deep conviction about himself and what he wants to be done. And the best argument I've heard by a Trump supporter say (that I have to agree with): with Trump in power, the media will be a ferocious attack dog constantly looking for misuse of power by him (as it should), while with a Hillary administration the mainstream media would be a lap dog of Hillary. And of course with Hillary Clinton administration, the Republicans would have lost their marbles totally. Fist fights in the House or Senate would be close.

Wouldn't be actually the first time in US history, actually.
Here's a chapter from "Drunk History":


Oh yeah, and then you got a civil war...

Its like the Brexiters over here. They are basically going Grrh ahh Grrh ahh sovereignty, Grrh ahh Grrh ahh reclaim our borders. Anyone who questions it is some sort of traitor to our great nation, or can't bare to loose, remoners. — Punshhh

This is the effect of populism. Populism that can emerge both from the right and left.

You see, you can criticize the EU, where it's going and yet keep the discussion civilized like with the lines of Margaret Thatcher. (Of course, then you might not be noticed.) The UK never got into a leadership position in the EU and obviously did feel sidelined by the Franco-German axis, hence there are many reasons for UK not having been fine and dandy with the EEC/EU.

Yet then you can go with the populist rhetoric of the elites being against the ordinary people, their evil intensions, spread fear about open borders, all the conspiracies etc. The thing is, the polarization, us to them, then does have consequences. Shouldn't be hard to figure out that with the juxtaposition you will alienate others. And populists are just fine with that.

And really notice that it isn't confined to the right. Leftists can be also very populist, especially in their hatred for the rich.

Actually it’s true, it’s all they have left. — Brett

Can you support that opinion with a fact?

Can you support that opinion with a fact? — ZzzoneiroCosm

No I could not, but time will tell.

I didn't vote in this last election, and I'm kind of glad about that.

There's facts, and then there's how to use facts, source of the facts being damned, at least as far as partisan politics go.

Sadly most discussions about this subject (saying nothing about "Trump one way or another) seem like they're predicated on basic ignorance of what "facts" are, or how facts are used in anything resembling a consistent and objective setting, such as a trial or a court of law, or anything resembling non-sensationalist journalism and the ignorance it's predicated on an marketed to to begin with; often the word "fact" is just falsely conflated with the word "true", when in reality, facts are just isolated pieces of information, which could be combined in a virtually infinite number of ways to create, establish, or advocate any theory, premise or conclusion, regardless of the ultimate merits thereof are.

Much as how most if not all mass media is more or less predicated merely on regurgitating a set opinion or piece of bite sized information, usually substantiated by confirmation bias to support a presupposed conclusion for any number of reasons, many of them more emotional than rational or logical to begin with.

What I mean by there being 'no facts in Trumpworld' is that first, Trump is notoriously mendacious, a documented fact. Secondly, Trump himself shows no capacity to recognise facts, nor any respect for fact, or any ability to separate fact from what he wants to believe or from the many delusions that he frequently gives voice to. This also characterises many, in fact almost all, of his supporters (including those here.)

One of my very favourite aphorisms comes from an American politician of an earlier generation, Daniel Patrick Moynihan, who said:

Everyone has a right to their own opinions, but not to their own facts.

Another witch hunt gone:

Appeals Court Tosses Democrats’ Emoluments Lawsuit Against Trump

WASHINGTON—A federal appeals court threw out a lawsuit by more than 200 Democratic members of Congress that alleged President Trump was improperly profiting from his presidency.

A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit avoided legal issues related to Mr. Trump’s business holdings, deciding instead that the Democrats didn’t have a proper basis for suing.

Democrats had sought to argue that Mr. Trump was violating the Constitution because his private business empire was profiting from foreign governments that sought to patronize his hotels, resorts and other properties to build positive relationships with the president.

The lawmakers alleged that Mr. Trump couldn’t accept emoluments—things of value—from foreign governments without the consent of Congress.

The D.C. Circuit panel, which included an ideological mix of judges, ruled unanimously that the lawmakers didn’t have standing to proceed with their lawsuit because the group of 186 House members and 29 senators were in the minority in both chambers. That meant they couldn’t represent the institutional interests of either body of Congress, the court said Friday in an unsigned 12-page opinion.

“Our conclusion is straightforward because the members…do not constitute a majority of either body and are, therefore, powerless to approve or deny the president’s acceptance of foreign emoluments,” the court wrote.

WSJ


You’re Fired

Either another witch hunt is gone, or the constitution has yet again been subverted by partisan whim.

I guess we will never know either way...

The media in the United States has proven Chomsky's Propaganda Model to be accurate. I think people have noticed this, and unless one prefers to be informed from within this bubble, a vast majority of people aren't buying it.

Americans' Trust in Mass Media Edges Down to 41%

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Americans remain largely mistrustful of the mass media as 41% currently have "a great deal" or "fair amount" of trust in newspapers, television and radio to report the news "fully, accurately and fairly." This latest reading represents a four-percentage-point dip since last year and marks the end of improvements in back-to-back years after hitting an all-time low.

Although trust in the media has edged down this year, it is well above the record low of 32% in 2016 when Republicans' trust dropped precipitously and drove the overall trust reading down during the divisive presidential campaign. Republicans' trust is still at a very low level and a wide gap in views of the media among partisans persists as 69% of Democrats say they have trust and confidence in it, while 15% of Republicans and 36% of independents agree.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/267047/americans-trust-mass-media-edges-down.aspx