Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

kpete

(71,978 posts)
Tue Dec 11, 2018, 09:53 AM Dec 2018

RUDE PUNDIT: Impeach the Motherfucker (Don't Be Suckered by the Bill Clinton Comparison)

So much discussion is going on about whether or not Democrats should go forward with the impeachment of President Donald Trump, who is actually a bulging tower of rotting cantaloupes in a terrible-fitting suit. Many in the punditocracy are telling the incoming House majority to avoid impeachment and not even speak of it. Obviously, the chances of removing Trump from office in a trial after the House impeaches are slim to none, considering that the Senate will be made of 47 Democrats and 53 puking shit demons from GOP. We know that the puking shit demons aren't going to vote against their puking shit demon leader, and Democrats would need 20 of those vile fuckers to toss Trump into the toilet of history.

On WNYC this morning, Mara Liasson was making that point: why bother even talking about it when it's not gonna happen? She said that Democrats are worried that "if they go hellbent toward impeachment instead of passing legislation - even if that legislation goes nowhere in the Senate, it won't be signed by President Trump, at least they want to lay out an agenda for the voters - there will be a political backlash."

Then she used the well-worn point that the Bill Clinton impeachment led to Democratic gains in the 1998 midterms. Except we're not talking a massive tide here. Democrats gained 5 seats in the House and didn't lose any in the Senate. Yeah, that was a big deal compared to the 1994 ass-reaming the GOP gave to Democrats. But Republicans still ran Congress in 1999. And they still "won" the presidency in 2000 and kept control of Congress, at least until Senator Jim Jeffords left the GOP in May of 2001. The GOP won the Senate back in 2002. (Note: George W. Bush didn't really win in 2000, but we have been damned to pretend as if he did.)

So this idea that somehow Republicans suffered electorally is just a goddamn lie. Then-Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich suffered because he was forced out of the House for lots of hinky shit. Next in line for Speaker, Republican Bob Livingston, suffered because he resigned after he was caught fucking around on his wife. That's how we got child fucker Dennis Hastert for Speaker. Oh, the late 1990s were so charming. As far as elections go, though, Republicans lost a little bit, but not enough to drive them away. Not enough to make them stop being scandal-mongering, hypocritical ass-worms.



the rest:
http://rudepundit.blogspot.com/2018/12/impeach-motherfucker-part-1-dont-be.html

2 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RUDE PUNDIT: Impeach the Motherfucker (Don't Be Suckered by the Bill Clinton Comparison) (Original Post) kpete Dec 2018 OP
I agree 100% RP. watoos Dec 2018 #1
I Buy Every Word Of It ProfessorGAC Dec 2018 #2
 

watoos

(7,142 posts)
1. I agree 100% RP.
Tue Dec 11, 2018, 10:13 AM
Dec 2018

Last night the right wing narrative made me sick on cable news; Dems need to tone down impeachment because....

I did hear one voice, Auntie Maxine, tell the truth about the need for impeachment. By the way, RP, I have never seen you and Auntie Maxine at the same place at the same time. Just saying, mums the word with me.

The narrative should be that we have a president who is a threat to our nation's national security and the question shouldn't be if we impeach, but when.

I mean there is a laundry list of reasons why Trump can be impeached today.

ProfessorGAC

(64,951 posts)
2. I Buy Every Word Of It
Tue Dec 11, 2018, 10:30 AM
Dec 2018

There is no comparison. None. The lying now is to cover up crimes. The lying then was to cover up a personal secret.

Lying is still lying, but then there's armed robbery and stealing that candy bar when you were 6. Some lies are more substantive than others.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»RUDE PUNDIT: Impeach the ...