JimHow wrote:Good article forwarded to me written by Matt Taibbi that dispels your argument, Patrick.
Rather, it is CNN, NYT, MSNBC, Washington Post, etc., etc., in conjunction with the FBI, CIA, and the rest of the intelligence community, that are engaged in a coup against Orange Head.
Sometimes, there might be simple reasons why it might look like the whole cabal is colluding to get you! For partisan outlets, like MSNBC, they want to rile up the dems for the election (just as Fox wants to rile up Repubs). For other outlets, they don't want Trump, not because he was a repub and the outlets are in cohoots with dems, but because they feel that the damage that Trump is causing to national fabric, his tendency and penchant for disregarding laws and his overt/covert support to racism issues. Not to mention the chaos, nepotism, corruption and favoritism his administration was beset with, and few outlets want him out! If I understand correctly, the retired intelligence officials still retain clearance to view classified stuff, and maybe they see red flags in this administration with regards to national security! If intelligence officials are so biased and partisan, how come they didn't come out during Obama administration or Bush administration? I bet Jim, in your profession, the credibility of a witness is paramount, and if one has to pick the side of the intelligence apparatus vs Trump, who would you pick?
JimHow wrote:This impeachment "inquiry" is nothing more than an attempted coup and circumvention of a legitimate national election.
Hmm. I think founders' grandest experiment was 'democracy' not 'national election'. Like I said before, election is just a means to democracy, not an end. If democracy is being trampled, constitution is being rendered useless and rule of law is being violated, then what's the point of putting election on the pedestal, Jim? It's like arguing-- well, Hitler broke lot of laws even before WWII and did lot of bad things to German people. Do you still want to say, well he was duly and legitimately elected by people. Let him finish his term, and one should stay silent...So let Bundestag not oppose him or perform an oversight, and just be a rubber stamp. And boy, did they rubber stamp, and we all know how it ended. I don't know about others, but I cannot agree with that notion of governing...
JimHow wrote:As Marcus told me, the American election system is well-equipped to deal with the likes of Orange Head.
I find it hollow. That means congress, also with mandate from the people, is ok to abrogate their duty if something goes wrong with presidency! Then why do the impeachment articles be part of constitution then? It's like accepting one part of constitution (presidential mandate) and not accepting the other part of constitution (mechanism of congress' oversight and congressional mandate). The question should not be what to accept or not to accept, but the most important question should be if president and congress are discharging their duties, justly and impartially without any ulterior motives.
JimHow wrote:I'm as disgusted by Herr Trump and the McConnell-led GOP as anyone, but i also think the mainstream media and the career intelligence hacks and the Democratic Party apparatus share largely in the blame.
Orange Head ain't going nowhere.
Let's just get to the election, a short year from now, and throw the bum out. It's going to require a knockout, we aren't going to be able to depend on leaving it to the judges.
Good article:
https://taibbi.substack.com/p/were-in-a-permanent-coup
One of the most lazy journalism works I have ever seen! The article is full of assertions and no backed up reasoning to conclude his assertions. If things can be interpreted one way or the other, and if he chose his interpretations one way, he cared not to explain why his choice is prudent and makes sense. Comparisons with the so called 'Third World' countries, and 'waking up in a country whether your president will be there by nightfall' is as comical as it can get when the author presents no evidence why we should feel that way. I am not saying US is immune to the problems of developing nations, but he does not seem to understand the reasons why developing nations (aka, 'third world countries', a derogatory usage, IMO) have political crises such as coups. The article is full of just assertions like that and make one believe that the whole US bureaucracy, military, media and half the population are plotting to throw him out by illegal means. Wow, that's one hellava racketeering conspiracy to pull it off!
The whole analogy of "Obama-Al Qaeda" and "Trump-Golden Showers" is the classic case of misinformed and misguided comparison (not to mention to misguide the readers!)...I am not a psychologist, but I have observed that time and again how linguistics, analogies and accusations (not just accusations, but how the accusations are carried out) are used to frame the mindset and thinking of people, akin to the opinionated shows on cable news are tailored. The Obama-AlQaeda is the remotest possibility (Inspite of having such associations, one would become president-elect?) and getting it compared to Trump-Golden Showers (which by the way, is close to being believable with the already existing evidence about his life style, views on women, tapes, etc!) in the article. Ofcourse, factual ascertaining is important than mere assertions, but by comparing "something that is believable by most" to "something that most of us believe is not true" is the classic case of misguided analogy...You are basically elevating the position of 'something that is believable, in this case, Trump-Golden Showers' to 'something that is hard to believe, like Obama-AlQaeda nexus', which is what the author is trying to peddle. What a pathetic piece of journalism! I don't want to go any further and will just stop here...Yes, the article does dispel something--the notion of objective journalism!
