Before we review what’s scheduled to happen today at the Capitol re: the articles of impeachment, there is truly stunning new evidence that strengthens the Democrats’ accusations against Trump: Dozens of pages of notes, text messages, and other records that detail the work that Trump’s personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, and Giuliani’s associate Lev Parnas, conducted on Trump’s behalf in Ukraine and with his approval.
Among the documents is chilling evidence that Trump’s henchmen in Ukraine were following the US ambassador to Ukraine, Marie Yovanovitch, and had her under electronic surveillance as well.
The documents were given to Congress by Parnas and contain a series of exchanges between Parnas and a corrupt Ukrainian prosecutor, Yuriy Lutsenko, who was helping Giuliani dirty up Joe Biden and his son Hunter. But Lutsenko wanted something in exchange: For Giuliani to tell Trump to oust Yovanovitch because she was trying to root out the corruption that Lutsenko was engaged in.
A few main points:
1. Trump knew what Giuliani was doing. For the first time, there is a written record of Giuliani confirming that everything he was doing in Ukraine to try to smear Joe Biden, Trump’s chief political rival, was with the full “knowledge and consent” of Trump.
2. Parnas was the point man. Parnas, who spoke Russian, ran interference for Giuliani, talking to a range of Ukrainian officials in an effort to carry out Trump’s pressure campaign — including the corrupt prosecutor, Lutsenko.
3. Lutsenko badly wanted to get rid of Yovanovitch. Even though he initially had her support after replacing the previous corrupt top prosecutor, he soon was engaging in similar shady practices. As part of her campaign to rid Ukraine of widespread corruption, she started criticizing his office and supported a quasi-independent anti-corruption bureau that he despised. (BTW, she was not alone in this view: It was the consensus of the State Department and other agencies that Lutsenko was dirty.)
4. Lutsenko played both Giuliani and Trump. Lutsenko told Parnas that he had damaging information about Hunter Biden, but that he wouldn’t release it until Trump got rid of Yovanovitch. Trump obeyed and fired her, but guess what: There was no damaging information.
5. Yovanovitch was being watched. This is the most disturbing part: Remember that Trump told Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in that infamous phone call that Yovanovitch “was going to go through some things.” Well, Parnas’s documents make it sound like Trump’s minions were planning a mob hit on her.
A new character is unveiled in this whole mess: Robert Hyde, an ardent Trump supporter who is running for Congress from Connecticut. For some reason, he was working with Parnas and claimed in text messages that he had Yovanovitch under surveillance.
“Wow. Can’t believe Trumo [sic] hasn’t fired this b—-,” he wrote in one message to Parnas. “I’ll get right [on] that.”
He said he was in touch with a “private security” team near the US embassy in Kyiv that was apparently monitoring the ambassador’s movements.
“She’s talked to three people. Her phone is off. Computer is off,” he wrote in one message. In another: “They will let me know when she’s on the move.”
As she testified, Yovanovitch got a phone call from the State Department telling her to get on the next plane to the US because her security was at risk. And now we know the threat was coming from Trump’s henchmen. Incredible.
Her lawyer has demanded that the information about surveillance be investigated.
You can read more about this sordid affair and review the documents yourself in stories by the Associated Press in the Globe,by The New York Times, and by The Washington Post. There’s also a statement and a copy of the documents on the House Intelligence Committee website.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Trump will not be convicted or removed from office. That will have to happen through the ballot box and there’s only one way for that to happen – offer people real solutions to the very real problems we and the planet face. These competing show trials are a distraction to that. They convince not a single voter to switch sides. Trump’s supporters will believe he is being unfairly targeted no matter how much evidence is presented. Trump’s opponents have hated him from the beginning and are only looking for justification.
LikeLike
That’s like saying that OJ should not have been tried because he was so popular people would never believe he did it and he couldn’t be convicted.
Did you ever hear of doing the RIGHT THING? You, who act so superior to the Democratic politicians, are insisting that they should look the other way at the fact that Trump has done things that are truly dangerous to our democracy, because looking the other way will make them more “popular”.
The fact that you consider doing the right thing a “show trial” because you believe that Trump’s actions aren’t a problem is the real problem.
The Democrats have been offering lots of new ideas AND doing the right thing. Your belief that one must look the other way at criminal behavior by Trump to win is astonishing to me. That is the beginning of fascism, not the way for progressives to gain power.
Either you will change your mind when that kind of illegal behavior is done to “get” Bernie Sanders, or you are really a Russian troll who will say that Bernie “deserved it and can the Bernie supporters just shut up and admit he is just as corrupt as Biden is. I can just imagine your posts throughout 2020 talking about how you always knew Bernie was just as corrupt as any Democrat because you read some of his illegally obtained e-mails that told you so.
Do the right thing. It doesn’t matter if it is “winning” issue or a “losing” issue if it is the right thing. And those people who believe that doing the right thing is evil and wrong are always going to support Trump.
LikeLike
NYC PSP…you are truly a scary and toxic person. You are no better than the Forever Trumpers and wacky GOP as you verbally assail and assault anyone who doesn’t agree with your point of view 100%.
LikeLike
LisaM,
You are truly a scary person. You are attacking me for believing that when there is an extraordinary amount of evidence that a President believes he is above the law, he should be impeached.
You seem to want to make me the enemy and I am not. I am a Bernie voter who, like Bernie, understands who the real enemy is. You want to attack and smear everyone who doesn’t believe what you do.
No one should be attacking the Democrats for doing the right thing, a no one should be calling doing the right thing a “show trial”. Calling impeachment a “show trial” is a lie. Period.
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is not your enemy. Neither am I. When you look for enemies among the Democrats and attack your so-called “enemies” whenever they say something negative about Trump, you are simply acting like a right wing troll.
LikeLike
NYCPSP,
Instead of personalizing your comments about Dienne, why not try, “I disagree with you because . . . ” To say that she thinks she is superior to Democrats is emotionalizing the topic.
You are so well spoken and intelligent. Please don’t cheapen your comments about another intelligent commentator by using such language.
Debate; don’t debase. Dienne is entitled to her opinion. So are you. But calling someone like her a troll is silly and distracting.
LikeLike
Robert Rendo, Assistant Principal,
“To say that she thinks she is superior to Democrats is emotionalizing the topic.”
This is what dienne77 said of all people who support impeachment, myself included:
“Trump’s opponents have hated him from the beginning and are only looking for justification.” Trump’s impeachment is a “show trial”.
I admit to being guilty as charged to calling out what to me seemed like unquestionably a gratuitous comment that had no purpose but to denigrate us as people who would lie to “get” Trump because we have no ethical or moral core.
I used the word “superior”. I’m sorry as I forgot that when dealing with those who defend Trump, whether right wing Republicans or not, one must be very, very careful not to offend and using what you imply is practically a swear word — “superior” — I clearly stepped over a line that must never be crossed. Shame on me.
On the other hand, I don’t understand your clear double standard in which you have no problem with people implying that Diane Ravitch and others, including me, have no moral or ethical core and would impeach a President just because we didn’t like him. Or, as dienne77 says, we “hate” him, and that’s the only reason we would want to impeach him — to “JUSTIFY” our hatred.
I don’t understand your clear double standard in which you don’t have a problem with those who use words like “toxic”, “scary” and “wacky”, which don’t seem to bother you as much as “superior”. Does that meant that if I wrote a post using the ugly and nasty words that LisaM used, you’d be fine with it? Because i would not lower myself to do so although apparently you would approve of me more I did.
Playing the victim is what Trump and his supporters/defenders do all the time whenever they are called out on what they do. We are expected to “turn the other cheek” and say “oh we are so sorry for calling you out for the wrongs you did as I’m sure you had a very good reason.”
It is also classic abuser behavior. Do something awful, and then mischaracterize the people you attacked and insulted as victimizing you. Trump has perfected it, and apparently so have some of his loudest defenders on this blog. Mr. Rendo, I believe you aren’t one of them, but I suggest you stop enabling that behavior.
LikeLike
Robert Rendo….THANK YOU!!
LikeLike
NYCPSP,
I have never even remotely implied that Diane or others are “immoral” or lack an ethical core. Good try, but you can’t put words in my mouth or mischaracterize me. I would suggest that anyone not emotionalize their writing.
And two wrongs or many wrongs never make a right, NYCPSP!
I have personally communicated with Dienne and Diane outside of this blog, and have never had an issue maintaining a civilized and intellectual, political relationship with either.
I have been open and honest with Diane about my disagreement with her not criticizing the AFT, NEA, and UFT harshly and militantly enough, and yet I have also learned about circular firing squads. Have you learned about those squads? I am going to take the audacious step and believe that you are in the process of doing so . . . . As are others.
Your big takeaway, NYCPSP, is this:
Don’t get angry at your allies; get even with your enemies.
LikeLike
Robert Rendo says:
“I have never even remotely implied that Diane or others are “immoral” or lack an ethical core. Good try, but you can’t put words in my mouth or mischaracterize me.”
I did not write that Robert Rendo said that Diane or others are immoral. Robert Rendo, you are guilty of doing what you are accusing me of doing and putting words into my mouth. I suggest you re-read my post.
I stated that you were criticizing me for responding to a DIFFERENT person who implied that Diane Ravitch and other people who support impeaching Trump are immoral because we are only doing so to JUSTIFY OUR HATRED OF TRUMP and not because Trump had done anything that deserved impeaching. That is why I responded to dienne77 — because she made a horrifically insulting reply in response to an important post by Diane Ravitch. dienne77 claimed that people who supported impeachment were only looking for “justification” of our hatred. Do you realize how insulting that is to imply we have no moral or ethical core except to “get” a President we “hate”? And you are criticizing only me and not dienne77??
Again, I did not say that Robert Rendo insulted Diane Ravitch and others like me who support impeachment — you are the one who put words in my mouth. I said that you are attacking me for responding to a person who made that reprehensible comment in her post. And defending her right to make such insulting attacks on those who support impeachment and insisting that those who are insulted are the ones who are wrong for being too mean in their reply.
Apparently you think it is better to politely “debate” the issue of whether Diane Ravitch and others do or do not hate Trump enough to impeach an innocent President. That is the kind of false narrative that the Trump defenders certainly prefer to discuss. Instead of talking about the content of Diane Ravitch’s important post, we should take very seriously dienne77’s post and change the subject to whether or not Diane Ravitch and others hate Trump enough to impeach him for no good reason except to justify our own hatred. What is your opinion on that, since you feel it is worth discussing? Does Diane Ravitch hate Trump enough to support impeachment just to justify her hatred just like dienne77 claims is true in her post?
Why don’t you “politely” debate dienne77 on whether Diane Ravitch and others just want to justify their hatred of Trump or not?
Let me suggest that you scroll below to read this post that might help you understand better. Your response was not nearly as wise as CBK’s and I think it would help you to read what Catherine King wrote and consider it as you continue to defend dienne77’s right to invent facts to attack and insult all Trump critics.
Catherine King
January 16, 2020 at 10:55 am
Lisa M I thought when I read Renko’s note that it was nice–but in a way that assumes the person you are conversing with is not severely ideological and, further, has a modicum of decency and authenticity about their way of thinking, talking, and doing things. In other words, we want to assume that they are NOT trolling us.
But we’ve been dragged passed that point.
So now I would suggest Mr. Renko read Albert Camu’s “The Stranger;” and help everyone he knows to find a way (1) to be aware when fine logical arguments shift to existential threat; (2) to learn how to counter that threat each time it rears its head; (3) to recognize a charlatan (and his enablers) who knows how to push all of our psychological, social, and spiritual “buttons” and (4) to keep our integrity strong and in place at the same time.
It sounded to me that he hasn’t been paying attention? The situation has turned away from intellectual to tribal. For them, it’s about winning, and not about winning an argument. CBK
LikeLike
My three cents to Mr. Renko: First, you seemed to assume that I was saying YOU were ideological. I was not. I was saying that we can assume no longer that, when we are talking with Trump defenders, we are talking to reasonable people who want to know the truth (I wanted to say “sane,” but it’s more complex than that). In my experience, we are talking to rampant ideologues.
Second, I thought it was you who talked about a setting up a “nice” and reasonable discussion in a classroom, etc. <–this is what inspired me to write about having been dragged past that possibility. I love reasonable discussions, but it takes two, and this arena of discussion is not that: for instance, Rush, Fox News people, and many defending R’s have raised logical fallacies to an art form and WE have to talk to their puppets. But if I confused your note with someone else’s, I apologize for the oversight.
Third, I guess since you read Camu, then I should ask if you recognize some similarity between a main theme of the “The Stranger” and our “let’s have a reasonable discussion” left-leaning hand-wringers who keep being classroom-reasonable, and who only know how to be gobsmacked by the awful talk, and so don’t know what to do about having brought a knife to a gunfight. Read Bob Shepherd’s note about a conversation with a right-winger. It’s not hyperbole.
BTW, I err still, but learned a long time ago to read more than once before answering notes on a public forum–just some thoughts on that. CBK
LikeLike
^^Robert Rendo,
My apologies – after writing this I saw that you did read and respond to CBK’s post below. I know on a long thread it is easy to miss a comment, but clearly you did not, so there was no need for me to re-post it here. I’m sorry.
Something you wrote below: “I am not severely ideological and have far more than a modicum of decency.”
For the record, I have always believed that was the case – I certainly know you have a very great amount of decency! I apologize if anything in post implied that you did not.
However, I do believe we are in times when those who oppose fascism need more than “decency”. We need to stop worrying about being polite and instead start calling out directly those who are spewing untruths.
LikeLike
NYCPSP Your note reminds me that it’s the RULE OF LAW that keeps us from having to consider violence as an option to protect ourselves from those who think reasonable argument is for sissies.
And if I understand what’s going on, it’s the rule of law that is at stake here. And BTW, one of the stepping-stones to the demise of reasonable argument AND the rule of law is the privatization of education. With privatization, and regardless of some progress here and there, the foundation of our educational system is ripped up and moves from “the people” and the Constitution, to some arbitrary corporation, funder, religious zealot/totalitarian, or CEO, whatever. And we know where that can go. They don’t call it a “constitution” for nothing.
We can only “keep” our democracy only if those who live in it are educated enough to know what democracy means. Or as one of my teachers said so presciently, in a democracy, we don’t have a right to ignorance.
Also, buried at the heart of the very idea of freedom of speech is not that we can say anything we want (though we almost can) but, because no one can have all of the truth all of the time, only with that freedom can reasonable argument towards truth win out. (That’s why in oppressive regimes they jail their press.)
But let a corporation takeover education, and we deal a death blow to the seedbed of that freedom.
I’ll get off my soapbox now. Thanks, CBK
LikeLike
“Trump’s opponents have hated him from the beginning and are only looking for justification.” Seriously!? Are you joking?
Excuse me, but there is a lot of genuine stuff to hate about Trump: you know, the fact that he’s a serial liar, divider, con man, demagogue, racist, thinks there are good people amongst the neo-Nazis, anti-Semites, white supremacists and far right wing gun-toting militia goons. You really have to exist in some alternate universe not to know that Trump is an awful human being and an even worse president who has richly (bigly) earned his impeachment. Vote for Bernie and listen to Bernie’s advice: If Bernie doesn’t win the primary, then vote for the D who did win the primary.
LikeLike
There is no way that anyone who insists that impeachment is a “show trial” and the extensive evidence against Trump is a “nothing burger” will ever vote for a Democrat to defeat Trump. That kind of right wing rhetoric is coming only from people who don’t think Trump is anywhere near the problem that “evil Democrats” are.
By the way, I hear similar rhetoric from those on the right who claim they would vote for the “right” Democrat (i.e. a very conservative one), but if they don’t get who they want, then Trump isn’t so bad.
Both kinds of people are equally to blame if Trump wins a second term. Those on the right who claim they would have voted for Biden to stop Trump but since he isn’t the candidate, they refuse to vote for the person who won the primary. And those on the left who claim they would have voted for Bernie to stop Trump but since he isn’t the candidate, the refuse to vote for the person who won the primary.
In both cases, they are saying Trump is not so bad FOR THEM and so they’d rather have him President than someone who who they don’t like as much.
There are certainly those on the right who sound like those on the left – just the names of the candidates are different.
Although I haven’t really heard Biden supporters insisting that impeaching Trump is wrong — I only hear that from some who claim to be progressives but likely are not. Clearly real progressives like AOC and her squad who have been the targets of Trump’s hatred understand that he needs to be impeached, not “ignored” and empowered.
LikeLike
Trump has given many reasons to hate him.
Some, like me, thought he might be a harmless buffoon. Little did we know he was serious about hating Muslim, inciting hate crimes against Jews, eliminating environmental regulations, opposing any gun control, making nice with White supremacists and the KKK, befriending Putin, Erdogan, and Kim, disrupting NATO. He has been Putin’s useful idiot. Who knew?
LikeLike
It’s worse than that. Because not only is Trump serious about all of those things, but Trump is serious that the law does not apply to him!!
Trump committed crimes. Lifetime Republican Robert Mueller found evidence of those crimes and couldn’t cover them up even for another Republican and the party that he loved. Instead Mueller wrote a report that said he was respecting Trump consigliere Barr’s view that a President could not be tried for any criminal behavior — apparently including murder if he wants — while in office, but there was a remedy for that because a President who broke the law could be impeached. And Mueller offered the evidence for impeachment.
The Democrats did exactly what people like dienne77 were telling them to do and said “well, I guess we won’t impeach because people won’t like us”. And since Trump is a spoiled child who always gets his way, what happened when the Democrats followed dienne77’s advice and declined to impeach Trump?
Why, Trump went ahead and simply committed more crimes, demanding that Ukraine announce publicly an investigation to smear his strongest political rival. And he made it clear to Ukraine that they would get no aid until they made an announcement smearing Biden that met with Trump’s approval and the first versions did not.
If the Democrats follow dienne77’s advice and simply ignore this, what will Trump do next? Shoot someone on Fifth Avenue?
What exactly does Trump need rot do for dienne77 to believe he should be impeached and why would anyone believe that there would be a proper election when Trump defenders like dienne77 are saying that Trump should be allowed to do anything he wants?
What if Trump wants to imprison Bernie next? What if Russia hacks Bernie and his wife and stepson’s private e-mails and releases only the e-mails – out of context – that make him look bad? What happens if the Russians already have Bernie’s e-mails from 2016 but have been holding onto them? What if Bernie’s campaign was getting heads up about likely debate questions, too?
Those who believe in fascism are good with their “opponents” being punished without regard to the law. They only care if it affects their own families or their friends. That’s why so many non-Jewish Germans didn’t have a problem with Hitler. That’s why there are white Americans who still insist Trump’s corruption should be ignored because it isn’t directed toward them and they truly seem to believe that any Democrat who cares about racism should shut up.
LikeLike
Dienne, I think you want to reword that.
Trump’s [Meyer Lansky’s, Richard “The Iceman” Kuklinski’s, George Lincoln Rockwell’s, Samuel Little’s, Robert Hansen’s, Jeffrey Epstein’s– take your pick] opponents have hated him from the beginning and are only looking for justification.
LMAO. One doesn’t have to look hard or far.
LikeLike
I think it is interesting that dienne doesn’t seem to hate Trump at all. That’s why she is always careful to explain that it is “Trump’s opponents” who hate him, unlike her who understands him and feels he is just a little misunderstood because he is uncouth and had orange hair (the only two things that she ever criticizes Trump about.)
I notice that dienne77 is very careful in every single post to make it clear that Trump has not committed any crimes at all and any evidence against him is a “nothing burger” or just Trump’s “enemies” inventing things to “get” him.
LikeLike
Moscow’s Asset Governing America (MAGA) has been a Russian marionette for a long, long time: https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/11/19/trump-first-moscow-trip-215842
LikeLike
https://investigaterussia.org/media/2018-09-11/russian-money-behind-grahams-growing-defense-trump
LikeLike
https://www.vox.com/world/2018/9/12/17764132/trump-fbi-russia-new-york-times-craig-unger
LikeLike
To call the trial of someone who has committed treason, actual treason, against the United States a “show trial” is contemptible.
It is contemptible to compare Vlad’s Agent Orange being tried for one of his many treasonous activities to the victims of Stalin’s NKVD and the trails that followed from those operations, the events that gave us the term “show trial.”
It’s as contemptible as Trump’s calling media who expose his criminal activity “enemies of the people,” borrowing Stalin’s formulation.
LikeLike
Yes, just posted the same thing below.
I notice those kinds of ugly phrases that are truly propaganda used by dienne77 over and over again. It used to be “nothing burger” and now she has changed to “show trial”, which makes me think that “show trial” is the new right wing Trump-defender talking point.
LikeLike
I suspect that “show trials” is the new right wing talking point. I notice that whenever there is a new one, it appears in certain Trump-defenders posts.
I guess that is replacing the “nothing burger” that was previously seen in every right wing blog, Fox News, and certain Trump-defending posters’ on here.
Now it is “show trial”.
I suspect that 95% of the internet posts that use the words “show trial” are trolls.
LikeLike
In addition to being a treasonous servant of Russian interests and a lowlife mobster, Trump is also, of course, a morally contemptible racist: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_views_of_Donald_Trump
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2019/06/trump-racism-comments/588067/
LikeLike
Certain haters of the Democrats keep belittling any concern about racism as “identity politics”. I think that when anonymous posters claimed to be progressives but use right wing talking points like “show trial” and “identity politics”, they are probably trolls.
They pop up here every single time Diane Ravitch dares rot make a post that is too critical of Donald Trump. They feel a very odd need to defend Trump by making the completely false claim — an outright lie — that the Democrats are offering nothing but attacks on Trump. Despite the dozens of good bills sitting in the Senate that the Democratic House has passed. Despite the myriad of good issues that the candidates for President are running on.
I don’t know why, but I do know that AOC never says the hateful ugly things about Democrats that these anonymous defenders of Trump post on here.
LikeLike
Dienne, You’re broad-brushing the voters. “Trump’s supporters will believe he is being unfairly targeted no matter how much evidence is presented.” Those are the low-info die-hards, usually estimated at 30%. There are many others who care only about his trade or immigration or social policy & ignore how he gets there. Small difference– granted– same results.
But this is just a Fox meme: “Trump’s opponents have hated him from the beginning and are only looking for justification.” They love to say “hate” because it implies irrationality, & well, it’s just so wrong to hate someone. Trump opponents have hated his actions all along, repealing O executive orders & needed environmental regs, depleting the State Dept & diplomacy, pulling out of intl agreements, dissing NATO & our allies, publicly expressing faith in Putin denials over govt intel, installing unqualified fam members in the W Wing, refusing to liq assets or even turn over tax returns, etc ad naus. This is just the first time his actions have risen to the level of impeachability– clearly, can’t be masked as policy pref, & documented– by attempting to thwart the legislative branch AND our natl security interest to secure his own re-election.
LikeLike
Robert Rendo……THANK YOU! Spoken like a true educator. You should be moderator of the debate team at your school.
LikeLike
Lisa M I thought when I read Renko’s note that it was nice–but in a way that assumes the person you are conversing with is not severely ideological and, further, has a modicum of decency and authenticity about their way of thinking, talking, and doing things. In other words, we want to assume that they are NOT trolling us.
But we’ve been dragged passed that point.
So now I would suggest Mr. Renko read Albert Camu’s “The Stranger;” and help everyone he knows to find a way (1) to be aware when fine logical arguments shift to existential threat; (2) to learn how to counter that threat each time it rears its head; (3) to recognize a charlatan (and his enablers) who knows how to push all of our psychological, social, and spiritual “buttons” and (4) to keep our integrity strong and in place at the same time.
It sounded to me that he hasn’t been paying attention? The situation has turned away from intellectual to tribal. For them, it’s about winning, and not about winning an argument. CBK
LikeLike
CBK,
Thank you. You make a very good point that I will remember in these very scary times.
LikeLike
To All,
My school only has kindergartner and Pre-K . . . Alas, no debating teams.
I love Camus and have read his works in French.
I am well aware of the need to get rid of Trump and am working as hard as I can in doing so.
I am not severely ideological and have far more than a modicum of decency. I did not become an AP of a high needs, underfunded public school (having competed for that position) based on moral turpitude.
I used to comment a lot, but having taken on a different track in my career, I have barely any time to participate, much as I’d like to.
Anyway, I don’t want to make this about me . . . . or NYCPSP for that matter.
The bottom line is that we must get rid of this madman in the Oval Office and vote in better people into the Senate and Congress, period end of story.
Whether you like or hate or are indifferent to Trump, always remember that he is but a vicious SYMPTOM of the population at large, and THAT is the other real battle to be confronted and won.
Please consider that.
LikeLike
“Whether you like or hate or are indifferent to Trump, always remember that he is but a vicious SYMPTOM of the population at large, and THAT is the other real battle to be confronted and won.
Please consider that.”
Well said.
LikeLike
Hitler was also a symptom of the population at large.
Nonetheless, defeating Hitler was the first step to addressing those issues with the population at large. While Hitler was at his greatest power, what good did it do to keep criticizing and attacking those trying to defeat Hitler and implying that their focus on defeating Hitler ignored that Hitler was a symptom of a larger problem? They already knew that so what would have been the purpose in criticizing opponents of Hitler for no reason? To undermine Hitler’s critics, perhaps? To normalize Hitler?
I don’t think anyone who opposes Trump disagrees with the idea that there is something seriously wrong with a country where more than 40% of Americans supposedly embrace someone like Trump to lead.
The first step to addressing this is to hold Trump accountable. Not look the other way and ignore him as if what he is doing is normal. There was no chance to address the “symptoms” of “the population at large” in Nazi Germany while Hitler was empowered to do whatever he wanted.
LikeLike
“ The first step to addressing this is to hold Trump accountable. Not look the other way and ignore him as if what he is doing is normal. There was no chance to address the “symptoms” of “the population at large” in Nazi Germany while Hitler was empowered to do whatever he wanted.”
No question: The “leader” needs to be removed from office. His followers have always been there and without him their voice diminishes.
The problem is that he’s not the only one. Besides the voting public/average man and woman who follow and believe in him; there are those in power who support him, as well. People with great wealth. Influential people in the media.
Then there’s the gerrymandering, voter suppression, and electoral college.
I agree completely with you NYCPSP. We can’t allow Trump’s behavior to become normalized. And I’m saying that it’s not going to be easy. I’m sure you know that.
As a side note, regarding Hitler:
My friend’s parents lived in Nazi Germany throughout WWII. They were very much against Hitler and everything he did and stood for, as were many others in Germany at that time. The problem was that those who spoke up were executed.
LikeLike
. . . it’s really getting Stalin-esque, or Hitler-esque . . . take your pick. CBK
LikeLike
Both, in different ways. Stalin-esque in the fear-based obeisance of his toadies in the Senate and Hitler-esque in the use of race-hatred to stir up his base base.
LikeLike
Bob: Even worse is murdering your (supposed) enemies.
“5. Yovanovitch was being watched. This is the most disturbing part: Remember that Trump told Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in that infamous phone call that Yovanovitch ‘was going to go through some things.’ Well, Parnas’s documents make it sound like Trump’s minions were planning a mob hit on her.” CBK
LikeLike
Trump is a low-life thug. It is shocking that we have an entire political party supporting him. I’m pretty sure he must have kompromat, probably from the Russians, on Lindsay Graham.
LikeLike
This is the least of Trump treasonous actions and other high crimes, but hey, Capone went to jail for tax evasion, not for murder and running alcohol, drugs, protection rackets, gambling, and prostitution rings. Time to remove the Don, Cheeto “Little Fingers” Trumpbalone from office and find him a cell.
Is the orange skin and the orange jumpsuit too matchy matchy?
LikeLike
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_affairs_of_Donald_Trump
LikeLike
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_lawsuits_involving_Donald_Trump
LikeLike
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Trump_sexual_misconduct_allegations
LikeLike
(to the tune of “Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer”)
Rudolph the Ghouliani
had a very brown, brown nose,
squandered his former goodwill,
stroking Trump on TV shows.
All of the other Trumpties
used to laugh and call him names.
Even those abject toadies
thought him crooked and insane.
Then one Foggy Bottom eve,
Trumpty called to say,
“Rude one with your nose so brown,
won’t you take Joe Biden down?”
What happened then’s sheer folly:
thanks to lows the two men reached,
history will most remember that
Trumpty Dumpty was impeached.
For more songs and poems and cartoons about the Trump the Chump misadministration, go here: https://bobshepherdonline.wordpress.com/…/trump-don-the-con/
LikeLike
The mob hit thing is not far-fetched at all. Shortly before the 2016 election, the woman who was bringing suit against Trump for raping her when she was 13 years old at one of Epstein’s parties said, through her lawyer, that she was withdrawing her lawsuit because of treats that had been made on her life.
https://www.snopes.com/news/2016/06/23/donald-trump-rape-lawsuit/
LikeLike
cx: threats
LikeLike
The whole situation seems a bit McCarthyesque to me. Those who ignore history (the vast mass of Americans) are doomed to repeat it. This time, however, ‘Tail Gunner Joe’ isn’t simply a Senator, and the ‘Communists’ have mutated into ‘Terrorists’.
LikeLike
I thought this was a education blog.
LikeLike
Of course this is an education blog.
It matters who is chosen as Secretary of Education.
Federal education policy matters.
The person who is president matters by setting a model of behavior and truthfulness.
LikeLike
In case you’re a new reader here, Teacher, just to elaborate… It’s a blog hosted by a prominent educational historian with experience in developing and administering ed policy, so overlapping topics in ed, ed policy, and politics will be of interest to her. Many of us have careers that have been shaped and restricted by the politics of recent decades, which has directly affected ed policy, spilling right into the classroom. Those topics are especially relevant in this election year, with Dem candidates debating ed policy, and Reps & Dems debating school choice from anti-union, pro-minority, pro-publicly-funded religious ed, pro- & anti-pubsch points of view.
LikeLike
bethree5 Let me also offer that I am 73 having attended K-12 during the 50’s and having graduated HS in 1964. I remember being DRILLED in civics, which I had no interest in and so little understanding of. (We were poor; and I and three siblings had a single, working mother for all of my early life.) Nevertheless, our HS graduation hinged on passing this class. And so a small group of us got together and learned the stuff, at least (for me) in a horribly perfunctory fashion.
But it stuck, at least some of it, and importantly THAT it was important to someone, if not me. Since then, I have realized in my own teaching of adults that, in many cases, immigrants who are new US citizens have a much better knowledge AND appreciation of democracy (the US Constitution with its tri-part system, bill of rights, etc.) than many of my born-in U. S. citizen-students.
Keeping that in mind, and although I am an anecdote, I think presently we are experiencing a watershed moment: of a long-and-systematic (over 50 years?), multi-motivated marginalization in K-12: of history, civics, the social sciences, cultural studies, and in general the humanities and liberal arts (“liberal” here doesn’t refer to a political stance).
And so I want to ask Trump supporters whether and how much education they had in their past about civics, and if they understand anything about the political system they (still) live under, or how it differs from, say, Russia or China or North Korea? (Not to mention WWII’s Germany, or post WWII’s Soviet Union.)
And that question leads me to this one: If so, why don’t you recognize when this political system, that you claim to know about, is being systematically dismantled? (Or just that you are being lied to?)
And that question leads me to realize this: In our present state of affairs, there are only two choices for Trump followers: (1) either you really don’t understand the system you live in (and claim to love), and so are being unknowingly led step-by-step down the road to dictatorship and fascism OR (2) you are, knowingly supporting that movement and being so-led.
If there is some other way to understand our present situation and the mindset of Trump followers, do please enlighten me? CBK
LikeLike
A lot of Trump followers listen to Rush Limbaugh. Here is part of an interview that Rush had with Trump on Jan. 6, 2020. If all that you listen to is Fox, Hannity and Rush L, Trump is the greatest man who ever existed. This poor victim is being hounded irresponsibly by the Democrats. /s
Rush makes millions off of the gullible. Is Rush L really this stupid or does money cloud his judgements?
…………………..
America’s Anchorman Interviews President Trump
Jan 6, 2020
RUSH: And we are back with President Trump. You mentioned the impeachment hoax. Nancy Pelosi has not delivered these two articles of impeachment that are, frankly, both of them are jokes. What do you suspect is happening here with this? What is the politics of this? What are they trying to achieve here? I mean, I know throw you out of office and all, but what’s the point here, not sending these articles over?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, I think what they’re trying to do is affect the election illegally. That’s what they’re trying to do. But the reason that they’re not sending it because they’re — they are a joke. They are not crimes. There is nothing there. They found nothing. We went through two years of a Mueller report, you know that better than anybody, nobody covered it better. And we went through two years —
RUSH: I think I’m more frustrated by it than you are. You’ve had to deal with it. But it makes a lot of us livid —
THE PRESIDENT: Yeah.
RUSH: — because there’s nothing, everything to this has been made up. It’s worse than a hoax, the first part of it was a coup, and this is just the continuation of it.
THE PRESIDENT: Yeah, it’s so sad for our country. I mean, think of it. We’re fighting with Iran, we’re fighting with all of these different places, and, in many cases, doing great, making trade deals, doing so good, our country is doing so good, but I have to spend, and my team has to spend, time on this stuff. They found nothing. Just think of that. For two years an unlimited budget, unlimited talent and they found nothing, and they came up with two articles that aren’t even a crime.
RUSH: Well, there was nothing to find. It was all made up. I mean, that’s the frustrating thing here. It was all made up. There was nothing to find. There was nothing to investigate.
THE PRESIDENT: They created a situation that was false, that was fraudulent, and then they investigated the false, fraudulent situation, and they found nothing. It’s hard to believe. The whole thing’s hard to believe. And now, on top of it, they come up with two articles and they put it before — now, what happened is she doesn’t want to get a vote because how can anybody possibly — it’s totally partisan. You know, this is not what they had in mind as they call them the founders, right, they keep saying the founders, founders, but the founders didn’t have this in mind. You understand, it’s like I’ve never heard the word “founders” so much in my life.
RUSH: They don’t have anything in common with the founders anyway…
LikeLike
Rush Limbaugh is just another supper greedy member of the wealthiest 0.1 percent.
In 2008, Rush Limbaugh signed an eight-year deal with Clear Channel Communications worth $400 million to continue his radio show on its network. In 2018, Forbes listed his earnings at $84.5 million, up slightly from 2017 when he was ranked as the 11th highest-earning celebrity.
Rush Limbaugh got rich lying to and misleading millions of people. His greed keeps him from retiring.
LikeLike
FYI for fans of Jeopardy. See this tweet by super champion Ken Jennings:
“Remember, defending champion Ken Jennings wants you to vote for Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren.”
I love it! This was in response to a Mike Bloomberg tweet that referred to Ken and Jennings reply was priceless!
The smart money is on Sanders or Warren.
LikeLike
The Democratic in the House has 10 to 15 crimes they can impeach Trump for if we include the 10 Mueller provided for obstruction of justice, not including his obstruction during the House investigation.
I’ve also read that the House can impeach a president more than once.
I think the Democrats should impeach trump once for each alleged crime and schedule the impeachments so they keep coming right up the week before the November election
LikeLike
I’m glad the Democrats are impeaching Trump, even if it ends up adding to Trump’s support. It’s bringing truth to light and making an important statement: at least some Americans care about the Constitution and proper presidential behavior.
LikeLike
I read that the Bill the House passed that will limit Trump’s war powers might have enough votes in the Senate to pass.
If so, I think Trump will break that law, too, just as soon as he possibly can.
LikeLike
Republican party doesn’t stand a chance of a repeat in the White House if Trump is ousted. They’ll defend him until he’s either voted out or he’s re-elected. Might be wrong, but I don’t think they’ll care what happens to him afterwards, either way.
LikeLike
NPR reported on some of this yesterday afternoon, particularly the Yovanovitch surveillance. This is seriously creepy….
LikeLike
LOCK HIM UP! LOCK HIM UP! LOCK HIM UP! LOCK HIM UP! LOCK HIM UP!
………………………………………
We All Know Trump Lies. What We Forget Is How Corrosive It Is To Democracy.
I’ve been a journalist for 33 years. I’ve covered Congress. NASA and the military space program. City and county halls. The Florida statehouse. Criminal courts, including armed robbers and serial killers. In all of that time, I have never encountered a public official, a candidate for office, a bureaucrat, a defense lawyer or, frankly, an actual criminal who is as regularly and aggressively dishonest as the current president of the United States. And that includes a dozen years covering the Florida legislature….
The president will spew falsehoods about nearly everything, morning, noon and night. He lies in one-on-one interviews, in formal news conferences, and standing beside other world leaders. He lies in “official” government speeches and at campaign rallies.
Trump lied about the size of his inaugural crowd on his very first full day in office, at CIA headquarters standing in front of a memorial to officers killed in the line of duty. He invented “millions” of illegal votes by illegal aliens to rationalize Hillary Clinton’s popular vote victory. He made up Japanese officials who supposedly told him that Democrats wanted our country to fail, just to make Trump look bad. He told the leader of Pakistan that India’s prime minister wanted Trump to mediate an agreement on Kashmir. The Indian government within minutes put out a statement denying that Narendra Modi had said any such thing.
He has lied repeatedly about the status of the border wall he promised Mexico would pay for. (He lied several times that Mexico was actually paying for it, when, in fact, Mexico has not paid a single peso.) He has lied and continues to lie that China is paying the tariffs he imposed on imported Chinese goods. And he lies and he lies and he lies, over and over again, that he was somehow responsible for the VA choice law, which allowed veterans facing long wait times at VA clinics to see private doctors. In fact, it came to be thanks to three Trump nemeses: the late Arizona Republican Sen. John McCain and independent Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, who wrote it, and Democratic President Barack Obama, who signed it into law two years before Trump was elected…
Article: https://www.huffpost.com/entry/trump-untruth-lies-false_n_5e0bac46e4b0843d360c94ea?ncid=engmodushpmg00000006
LikeLike
Cultists ALWAYS have a complete immunity to evidence. A universal “get the guru out of jail card.” That’s how you can identify one. Does this immunity to any evidence exist? Does it quack like a duck? Here, an encounter with a member of the Trump cult
ME: Well, he’s clearly a Russian asset.
TRUMP CULTIST: Haaaaa! Russia? Puhleeeeeze. The Mueller Report totally exonerated him.
ME: No. Did you actually read the Mueller Report? I did. Mueller clearly says in it a. that if the evidence exonerated Trump, he would be saying that, b. that he is NOT saying that, and c. that it is up to Congress, not the DOJ, to bring indictments against the President. And he details 10 separate instances of personal obstruction of the probe by law enforcement on the part of Trump. And besides, the scope of the report was limited, and Trump has much more extensive ties to Russia than are covered there.
TRUMP CULTIST: Yeah, name one.
ME: OK, here are twelve reports on his extensive ties to Russia. On his traveling to Moscow in 1987 as a guest of the Soviet Ambassador on a KGB plane, of his money laundering sales of properties for cash to Russian oligarchs around Putin, about the tower he was attempting to build in Moscow at the time when he was denying to Americans that he had any business in Moscow, of the enormous loans he got from Putin’s bank after he had gone bankrupt and no American bank would touch him, about his extensive Russian contacts, about the contributions of Russian oligarchs to political PACs supporting him, about his history of carrying out whatever foreign policy initiatives the Russians wanted.
TRUMP CULTIST: Well, that just shows why you think like this–the sources you read. All fake news.
ME: It’s interesting that you think of any news source that is not stroking Trump as fake news. Even the US intelligence agencies and federal law enforcement.
TRUMP CULTIST: Deep State.
ME: OK, here are what Republicans have said about Trump over the years. Liar. Con man. Racist. Bigot. Sexist. Understanding of a five year old. ****ing moron.
TRUMP CULTIST: Never Trumpers.
ME: So, any anti-Trump information is Fake News, the Deep State, or Never Trumpers.
TRUMP CULTIST: Exactly.
ME: Or can be corrected with a Sharpie.
LikeLike
Bob Shepherd: As my brother said, “Trump is the best president this country has ever had.” I emailed him information and he labeled all of it ‘fake news’. Rush L, Fox and Hannity are the truth-tellers.
What is there to say when there are around 40% of the population who no longer believe our media or any facts?
LikeLike
Nothing can be done about this. Argue with a brick wall, and the wall will win. Cults have to run their course and do their damage, or so history teaches us. One of the few counterexamples of this was the reaction against McCarthyism as a result of high-profile challenges to it.
LikeLike
I have a cousin, Carol, with whom I grew up, very like a brother. He started posting and sending emails about how Trump was chosen by God to Make America Great Again. I then found out that he was suffering from early onset Alzheimer’s. Very sad.
LikeLike
Bob Shepherd: Your cousin isn’t the only one. I guess Trump is not only ‘making America great’, he is inspired by the divine. [Oh good grief. I laughed when I typed that.]
Evangelicals told Trump he was “chosen” by God. Now he says it himself
Religious right leaders say God anointed Trump as a “king.” This week he actually declared himself the “chosen one”
AUGUST 22, 2019 5:35PM (UTC)
Even for a bottomless pit of narcissism like Donald Trump, Wednesday was an exceptional day for self-aggrandizement. Early in the day, Trump tweeted quotes from one of his more sycophantic — and unhinged — followers, Wayne Allyn Root, calling Trump the “King of Israel” and “the second coming of God.” Later that day, when speaking to reporters, Trump embraced the prophet identity again, calling himself “the Chosen One,” in response to a question about trade dealings with China.
To be certain, Trump laced in just enough plausible deniability — that he might be joking, that these are just metaphors — to give his supporters grist when accusing liberals of being hysterical for being alarmed about all this. But the grim reality is that Trump is channeling — and in the first instance, directly quoting — the beliefs of evangelical conservatives, a powerful constituency that still holds enormous sway within the Republican Party. And those folks are telling Trump, regularly and in grandiose terms, that he is in fact the Chosen One and has been anointed by God to be the president …
Check out this article! https://www.salon.com2019/08/22/evangelicals-told-trump-he-was-chosen-by-god-now-he-says-it-himself/
LikeLiked by 1 person
And this is exactly why the only way to get rid of IQ45 is through the ballot box. The Senate is still run by the GOP and they clearly value Party over People, Control vs Democracy. Cultists have a tribal mindset and follow blindly along repeating only the information (GOP) that is fed to them. Cultists aren’t very deep thinking people IMHO. If McCain were still alive and sitting, I believe that Impeachment would be inevitable as he was a respected, reasonable, cool headed, personable kind of politician who had the ability to sway votes. As it stands now, I’m afraid the Impeachment trial in the Senate is going to look like a circus and distract from the upcoming election cycle. The values in the Senate need to change before the country can change. We are stuck either way.
LikeLike
I have not given up yet on his being removed. Perhaps our intelligence agencies will finally dump into the public sphere all the crap they have on him. Perhaps one of the many, many sexual abuse, rape, and predation charges against him will come to a head in the news because of a recording or credible witnesses.
LikeLike
We can only hope. If any credible witnesses or recordings are found, McConnell, Graham and the cultists will just keep making excuses. It’s all a big mess.
LikeLike
We would all be better off in this country if we supported those politicians who did the right thing instead of those who refrained from doing the right thing because of fear.
“I’m afraid the Impeachment trial in the Senate is going to look like a circus and distract from the upcoming election cycle.” For the record, this is exactly the rhetoric that people were saying when the House finally decided to impeach Trump. They pointed to poll after poll about how the majority of Americans opposed impeachment. In fact, many people posted those kinds of “warning” on this very blog. It would “hurt” Democrats.
I was glad that the House did the right thing and impeached Trump instead of listening to the voices of fear whispering and shouting that they should not do the right thing because people wouldn’t like them. The way to win elections is to stand up for what is right, not to be cowardly and fearful. The right wing knows that which is why they spend so much time and effort pushing propaganda to scare Democrats to govern out of fear instead of out of what is right.
And it turned out that having impeachment hearings and letting Americans see for themselves the evidence that Robert “I can’t talk about it read my report” Mueller’s testimony glossed over. The House called witnesses who weren’t fearful and cowardly like Mueller.
And it turned out that when Americans stood up for what is right, the public supported them.
What astonished me after that is what happened AFTER the Democrats in the House were brave enough to go ahead with impeachment despite those repeating right wing propaganda that it would hurt them at the ballot box. The very same people who warned the Democrats not to impeach Trump because the voters didn’t want that and it would hurt them then turned around, without one once of integrity, and accused the Democrats of ONLY impeaching Trump for political advantage!!!
You see, those people are not real critics. The Democrats didn’t listen to them last time and did the right thing. Doing the right thing didn’t backfire like those people kept warning and so those false voices claimed that the Democrats ONLY did the right thing for political advantage!
What does that tell us? That tells us that we should stop listening to those — either trolls or cowards — who keep insisting that the Democrats should be terrified of doing the right thing and appealing to the most cowardly part of all of us. Appealing to cowardice is certainly effective — you can see that in any middle school with all the fearful students who are terrified to stand up to the popular mean girls or mean boys. But we aren’t in middle school anymore. And it’s time to stand up for what is right even if it makes you unpopular.
And of course, if it turns out, like some middle school fiction, that those who stand up to bullies and do the right thing discover there are lots of other kids who support them standing up to bullies, we know that there will always be those dishonest voices who claim that the Democrats only stood up to bullies to make themselves popular.
I can only imagine how that middle school fiction would go. Kid gets bullied by a group of horrible mean boys and all the other kids say “don’t say anything, it might backfire and those kids are so popular and if you stand up to them no one will like you.” Brave kid stands up to bully and kids cheer him on. And then, brave kid is attacked and insulted by bullies who say that brave kid only stood up to them in order to be more popular.
Because that is certainly the narrative we have seen playing out. The very same people who demand the Democrats be cowardly because if they are brave they won’t be popular then turn around and claim that the Democrats who didn’t listen to them and acted bravely were just acting brave to be more popular. It’s a false narrative and it needs to be called out as false instead of treated as if it is legitimate criticism. Those who said the Democrats shouldn’t be brave because that would ruin their chances of winning in 2020 now say that the Democrats were only brave to help their chances of winning in 2020.
Since those people will attack the Democrats no matter what, and blame their loss on their actions whether they are brave or cowardly, there is only one answer. Don’t listen to those people and act bravely.
Do the right thing. Do what is morally, ethically and legally right, not what is popular or will help them win.
And impeaching is the only action that is proper. Those that attack the Democrats for impeaching a man who it is morally right to impeach astonish me because they seem to be saying that Democrats should do the wrong thing just to win an election. Doing the right thing is not about elections or popularity. It is about standing up for what is moral and not being cowed by bullies.
LikeLike
This was sent to me by a friend in Canada who totally dislikes Trump.
………………………..
Facebook’s Role in Brexit…and linking the same players and tactics to the 2016 US presidential election
In an unmissable talk, journalist Carole Cadwalladr digs into one of the most perplexing events in recent times: the UK’s super-close 2016 vote to leave the European Union. Tracking the result to a barrage of misleading Facebook ads targeted at vulnerable Brexit swing voters — and linking the same players and tactics to the 2016 US presidential election — Cadwalladr calls out the “gods of Silicon Valley” for being on the wrong side of history and asks: Are free and fair elections a thing of the past?
This talk was presented at an official TED conference, and was featured by our editors on the home page.
LikeLike
The story behind the data that Facebook gave to Cambridge Analytica has been one of the most underreported stories in this country.
Peter Thiel was on the Facebook board at the time and had a huge amount of influence on the gullible Facebook execs like Mark Zuckerberg who clearly worshipped those with money and just “knew”
they were the smartest guys in the room. The young Facebook execs acted like the Enron guys who just worshipped Jeffrey Skilling and Ken Lay. They would do anything to please them, panting at the feet of the master for a bit of praise. And employees of Facebook board member Peter Thiel’s company helped Cambridge Analytica use the Facebook data. Thiel was a huge Trump supporter and spoke at the RNC to praise Trump.
It is absurd that those ties have been all but ignored by the media. The likelihood that employees of Peter Thiel’s company Palantir just “coincidentally” happened to be working with Cambridge Analytica when they got Facebook data is almost nil.
If those people were all Democrats, the NY Times would have been running non-stop headlines and digging into it. Instead, the typical credulous reporters say “what an interesting coincidence that a Facebook board member’s company just happened to be helping Cambridge Analytica use Facebook data and that board member just happened to be a huge Trump supporter. Now let’s move on to the real scandal, something mean a Democrat said about Trump.”
And yes, I’m sure this was going on with Brexit, too, with British Facebook users being inundated with specially designed ads based on everything that Facebook improperly shared about them.
LikeLike
The subtext is also important. Trump could easily have removed Yovanavitch from her position. Instead, we learn about a process that included threatening, playing cat and mouse, stalking, creating uncertainty for her, crafting situations to prolong her misery,… It’s the sickness of Trump and his associates e.g. the patriarchy of the religious right. A female ambassador was a particularly attractive target for the administration’s pathology. Eleven beleaguered GOP women remaining in the U.S. House, 186 white, male colonialists.
LikeLike
Yes, there is this incredibly creepy, sexist component to all this. Trump used to refer to his Homeland Security Secretary, Kirstjen Nielsen, when he was upset at her because she was not yet SHOOTING asylum seekers, as “Sweetheart,” in an incredibly nasty, snarly, condescending way. And she was on his side with regard to all this! I would say that he is a pig, but that would be unfair to pigs.
LikeLike
He’s an uncouth, lowlife thug with someone else’s money, like Gotti.
LikeLike
Here is the comment on Thursday afternoon from our uncouth, disgusting, lying, narcissistic, ignoramus of a president:
Donald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump
I JUST GOT IMPEACHED FOR MAKING A PERFECT PHONE CALL!
2:39 PM · Jan 16, 2020·Twitter for iPhone
51.6K
Retweets
292.8K
Likes
LikeLike
How can any human being take the phrase, “A PERFECT PHONE CALL” seriously?
Third grade mentality. Gets worse and worse.
LikeLike
Trump left out the one word that would describe that as a “perfect phone call”
Trump’s tweet should have said, “a perfect unconstitutional phone call”.
LikeLike
Written by a “very stable genius.”
LikeLike