Impeaching Donald Trump

[RSL]

Hmm, let me name the ways. You are living in a world where Iran is more likely to get the bomb. You are living in a world where the climate is more likely to change in disastrous ways. W where the air and water are more polluted. You are living in a country where scientific expertise is being stripped from the government. Where mendacity and venality have become the norm at the highest levels of government. Where the rule of law is flouted. Etc etc etc.

Are you really not aware of all this? Or do you just not care?

Hi, Peter. I'm fully aware that this is the kind of garbage our fake news media pump out by the bushel. I'm aware enough of what's really going on to ignore it. How about you? Guess not.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

So you prefer a corrupt President over a valuable and respected diplomat, just because he can fire people at will, or start a war?...

Yes, because that's who we elected. We didn't elect her and couldn't care less about her "value and respectability." However, my "yes" doesn't mean I agree with your descriptor "corrupt."

[RSL]

You want fries with those jobs?

Hi, Peter. So as far as you're concerned, the only jobs worth having are as CEO of a multinational? You'd rather have your government hand out taxpayers' money to unemployed people than let them make a buck pushing hamburgers and fries? Well, that's certainly the spirit that pumped up Venezuela's economy to its world-beating level.

[PeterAit]

The rooster: <crows>

The sun: <comes up>

The rooster: "Lookie what I did!"

In a nutshell, this is Trump taking credit for the economic recovery, which started in 2010. The most one can say about Trump is that he didn't screw it up.

[RSL]

The most one can say about Trump is that he didn't screw it up.

Which Obama did, again and again.

[Robert Roaldi]

Hi, Peter. I'm fully aware that this is the kind of garbage our fake news media pump out by the bushel. I'm aware enough of what's really going on to ignore it. How about you? Guess not.

We'd appreciate it if you shared with us your alternate sources of information, given that the ones mentioned so far are so unreliable.

[Robert Roaldi]

Which Obama did, again and again.

The economy has been on an upward trajectory since after the 2008 crash. Tying current economic performance with the sitting President's actions is a mug's game. They manipulate strategic levers, which by definition means that their effects are diffuse and felt over the long term. Correlating the number of jobs created last month with current politics is propaganda. Unfortunately, everyone engages in it.

Your assertion that Obama screwed up the economy is simply ridiculous. You're just repeating Trump talking points. We have enough of that from politicians.

More generally, the constant references back to Obama and Hilary are getting old. Change the record.

[Robert Roaldi]

Yes, because that's who we elected. We didn't elect her and couldn't care less about her "value and respectability." However, my "yes" doesn't mean I agree with your descriptor "corrupt."

You may be missing the larger point. Maybe the ambassador serves at the pleasure of the president, but that's not the same thing as the president's whim, is it? He may have the right to fire them at his whim, but others have the right to judge that action, maybe even the duty to call him on it. You may not like that, but that's ok.

[Alan Klein]

Trump fired someone?  Why is that news?

[Alan Klein]

Here's the people closest to him who were fired or left or disappeared?? 
https://www.cnn.com/interactive/2017/08/politics/trump-admin-departures-trnd/

[RSL]

The economy has been on an upward trajectory since after the 2008 crash. Tying current economic performance with the sitting President's actions is a mug's game. They manipulate strategic levers, which by definition means that their effects are diffuse and felt over the long term. Correlating the number of jobs created last month with current politics is propaganda. Unfortunately, everyone engages in it.

Your assertion that Obama screwed up the economy is simply ridiculous. You're just repeating Trump talking points. We have enough of that from politicians.

More generally, the constant references back to Obama and Hilary are getting old. Change the record.

Robert, the economy always is on an upward trajectory after a recession. Were it not, we'd call it a continuing recession. The problem with the Obama "upward trajectory" was that time and again he did things to slow it down. Compare his recovery to the recovery during Reagan's era-- and for that matter during Trump's partial term. At the moment, employment is rising and wages are rising. Yes, during Obama's terms employment was rising, but not nearly as fast as it's rising now. At the moment, African-American and Hispanic employment are higher than they've ever been. (Oh yeah, pointing that out is a "mug's game). Happily, we don't know what the situation would have been under Hillary, and, happily, we're never going to find out.

[PeterAit]

Hi, Peter. I'm fully aware that this is the kind of garbage our fake news media pump out by the bushel. I'm aware enough of what's really going on to ignore it. How about you? Guess not.

So your answer is that you don't care. Why am I not surprised.

[RSL]

So your answer is that you don't care. Why am I not surprised.

I care very much, and looking at what Trump's achieved, I'm happy as a clam. You can go on being unhappy if that's your choice.

[Alan Klein]

The economy has been on an upward trajectory since after the 2008 crash. Tying current economic performance with the sitting President's actions is a mug's game. They manipulate strategic levers, which by definition means that their effects are diffuse and felt over the long term. Correlating the number of jobs created last month with current politics is propaganda. Unfortunately, everyone engages in it.

Your assertion that Obama screwed up the economy is simply ridiculous. You're just repeating Trump talking points. We have enough of that from politicians.

More generally, the constant references back to Obama and Hilary are getting old. Change the record.

Trump's tax bill helped the economy a lot.  More personal wealth, lower business taxes, better trade agreements, lowered regulations have all contributed to a better economy.  Unfortunately, we're still spending like drunken sailors on a six month shore leave, my apologies to the navy.  So increased borrowing and new printing of dollars will hurt us more in the future.  Short term it looks good for the re-election.  But I'm afraid we'll all pay the piper later on. 

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... but others have the right to judge that action, maybe even the duty to call him on it. You may not like that, but that's ok.

I am ok with people not agreeing with his reasoning for firing her. I am, however, also pointing out that it is not some sort of a smoking gun in a mafia trial, like "omg, there is a tape with him asking to get rid of her," with the implication that involves a larga trunk and a shovel. He fired her for disagreeing with his policies, not on a whim. Perfectly within his rights.


I am not making any judgment about her reputation or respectability. I do not know her. In my seven years of working for the State Department, I met plenty of smart people and plenty of dumb people (the latter being more ideologically aggressive). I do not know where she falls within that spectrum.

[Peter McLennan]

  But I'm afraid we'll all pay the piper later on.

"afraid" ?  Really?  Debt is debt. The chickens will come home to roost. He stole that money from your kids and their kids.

[Alan Klein]

Ambassadors not only serve at the pleasure of the president.  They are the president's voice.  They are suppose to echo his policies which are the people's policies.  The president is elected.  Ambassadors are not.  If they can't support the president's views, they should resign.  If they screw up, the president takes the hit, not them, like when Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait thinking he got an OK from the American ambassador that America would look the other way.  In that case, an ambassador's screw-up caused a war that the president had to to correct. 

How many here would go against their boss's requests and ignore their policies? 

[PeterAit]

We'd appreciate it if you shared with us your alternate sources of information, given that the ones mentioned so far are so unreliable.

Relevant to this topic is a new poll where a bunch of people all over the political spectrum were presented with a list of 30 media sources, ranging from very liberal to very conservative, and asked which ones they trusted. The conservative-leaning responders trusted only 7, and 4 of them were Fox, Breitbart, Sean Hannity, and Rush Limbaugh. Amazing! Four or the most inaccurate news sources on earth, as proven over and over, and so many people actually trust them?!?! I knew this, of course, but to see it laid out in black and white.....?

[Alan Klein]

"afraid" ?  Really?  Debt is debt. The chickens will come home to roost. He stole that money from your kids and their kids.

Well,  congress is responsible for spending and the budget.  They should have cut spending the same time they cut taxes.   Of course he's involved as much as they are.  But so are the voters who refuse to ever give up a government benefit.  SO all the politicians, president and congressmen and senators alike, all go on spending like drunken sailors. Otherwise they''ll lose our greedy vote.  It's all our fault and it's been going on for decades. 

We won;t have to wait until our kids and grandkids.  Inflation will wipe out our wealth and value of our assets.   

[PeterAit]

Yes, because that's who we elected. We didn't elect her and couldn't care less about her "value and respectability." However, my "yes" doesn't mean I agree with your descriptor "corrupt."

"We" did not elect him. "We" (the American people) rejected him by a large majority.