U.S House Rep. Al Green has recently stated that he wants racism to be part of Trump's articles of impeachment, pointing to Andrew Johnson's impeachment articles that included racism:
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
U.S. House Rep. Al Green wants racism to be part of Trump's articles of impeachment, pointing to Johnson's impeachment articles that included racism
- Thread starter Deleted member 3812
- Start date
Trump and his sycophants definitely racist but the material of this actual impeachment case is not racism. Guess it would just fall into miscellaneous high crimes and misdemeanors
This would detract from his actual impeachable offenses (not saying he shouldn't be held accountable for being a racist POS) and allow the Republicans to muddy the water. Not sure I'm a fan.
I think the main issue with this arguement is that the impeachment articles he's citing as precedent didn't actually go through
100 percent behind this. I know it won't make much of a difference but I wanna see the senate debate over this. They should zoom in on Goebbels immigration policy of putting children in cages in particular.
If it happens, I bet somebody's gonna throw a "well racism isn't that bad"
Yea just get them on record and make them squirm on the topic. Then just sit back and wait for Trump to open his mouth and fuck it up in public.
The republicans aren't waiting for an opportunity to 'muddy the water,' they're actively supporting fake news, alt-right fringe conspiracy theories about the actual intent of the proceedings to create uncertainty as it is.
Yeah like the entire Republican strategy is to just be constantly shitting in the water
Counterpoint: They have been muddying the waters this entire time with not a single iota of shame so I'm not sure why we're worrying about them starting now.
He's definitely a racist, and should answer for that, but I'd be wary of including it.
It'll just add to the right's "they're just looking for reasons to kick him out!" and "they just label everyone they disagree with racist!" narratives, and then the discourse will just fall down the "critics say these incidents were racist in nature, the white house disagrees" rabbit hole.
I get it, though. Half of me just thinks "fuck it, they'll whine anyway, might as well drag everything into the light."
It'll just add to the right's "they're just looking for reasons to kick him out!" and "they just label everyone they disagree with racist!" narratives, and then the discourse will just fall down the "critics say these incidents were racist in nature, the white house disagrees" rabbit hole.
I get it, though. Half of me just thinks "fuck it, they'll whine anyway, might as well drag everything into the light."
Then it would be the perfect time to introduce to the public how Trump first became famous in the 70s and then build the case that he's always been corrupt.
They have been and we have laughed at their hilarious attempts as they legitimately have no leg to stand on with regards to the Ukraine inquiry. The majority of Americans agree this was improper and are in support of impeachment.
Bringing racism into this would change the entire conversation. Not just by Republicans, but mainstream media as well. CNN is probably lusting at having panel after panel debating "Is Donald Trump racist?". Ukraine would be an afterthought.
Let's just impeach the fucker with the flagrant violation we have now.
This is exactly why Pelosi and leadership want to keep the inquiry limited to Ukraine.
as soon as you open the door for articles unrelated to Ukraine, there will be no limiting factor and you'll end up with 40 of them. Then all 40 will individually need to be voted on, and some of those would be very hard votes for members from moderate districts.
so where we'd almost certainly end up is either (a) a bunch of vulnerable dems put their reelection in doubt by supporting articles that lack mainstream support of (b) a case where 36 out of 40 articles fail to pass the house and the republicans can assert that even the democrats think he's "90% innocent"
worse once this all gets to the senate, McConnell can shape the trial around the least popular articles and potential turn opinion from trump's crime to partisan overreach
as soon as you open the door for articles unrelated to Ukraine, there will be no limiting factor and you'll end up with 40 of them. Then all 40 will individually need to be voted on, and some of those would be very hard votes for members from moderate districts.
so where we'd almost certainly end up is either (a) a bunch of vulnerable dems put their reelection in doubt by supporting articles that lack mainstream support of (b) a case where 36 out of 40 articles fail to pass the house and the republicans can assert that even the democrats think he's "90% innocent"
worse once this all gets to the senate, McConnell can shape the trial around the least popular articles and potential turn opinion from trump's crime to partisan overreach
The idiot obviously deserves it but does this help or hurt us get to 50 votes in the Senate next year? Sadly I can't help but feel it will weaken the case for the general public unless it is focused on a specific policy decision, especially at this point in the process when the illegal Ukrainian business has been placed as the singular focus of the inquiry
Locking brown refugees in cages after stating "why don't we get more white refugees" is a specific racially motivated policy decision.
I'd agree with that. I just wonder why Green didn't list something like that as part of his previous articles of impeachment and focused on topics with less demonstrable, criminal damage like the shithole countries comment, Colin Kapernick, and the Charleston comments, which are all no doubt horrible but comparatively much weaker in terms of evidence and damages.
The Judiciary was already engaged in their own impeachment inquiry before Ukraine, and they were considering the whole package ala Andrew Johnson and Nixon. More importantly, the judiciary kept Al Green's racism referral instead of kill it back in September, so we'll see. For reference, the intelligence committee is another such referral that was also voted on among judiciary party lines.
We already know about the internal debate behind expanding:
You have my axe, Judiciary, if you expand and swarm. America needs to be made to confront the enveloping crime spree and to face reality in just how much of a piece of shit Trump is. Even with a senate show trial, may it drag as many GOP Trump sycophants down into the mud and onto their heels going into 2020.
We already know about the internal debate behind expanding:
You have my axe, Judiciary, if you expand and swarm. America needs to be made to confront the enveloping crime spree and to face reality in just how much of a piece of shit Trump is. Even with a senate show trial, may it drag as many GOP Trump sycophants down into the mud and onto their heels going into 2020.
