American Politics Discussion Thread

[greenline]

Trump was brought to trial originally for his taxes and allegations of Russian collusion that turned out to be bogus. He was recently convicted, not for anything to do with a 'coup', but because he paid a lawyer to pay money to a porn star to stay silent during the 2016 campaign. And this offense is normally a misdemeanor under New York law, but the Manhattan jury voted to upgrade it to 36 felony counts because Trump paying hush money could have been adjacent to some other felony crime, which the judge was not required to prove or even describe. (Hillary Clinton was pardoned, free of charges or fines, for a similar campaign offense).

We don't have evidence that this desire to send Trump to prison came from the Biden administration - all of the prosecutors involved in the New York scene seem very eager to put out such bullshit judgments on their own, in the hopes it will make them famous within the party. We do know that pressure came from the Biden administration to discard or pass favorable judgments on cases relating to Hunter Biden. I'm not sure why this is supposed to be better.

[Mjmd]

AND AGAIN EVEN IF TRUE (which I just spent time saying we don't have evidence for) it doesn't make it ok for Trump to do something worse.

Greenline
We do know that pressure came from the Biden administration to discard or pass favorable judgments on cases relating to Hunter Biden.

Source? 

Your red hering again. See first quote. 

For sake of argument, lets assume the direct evidence we have that Trump was pressuring for Biden investigations is equal to other Democrats who aren't the president of the united states doing investigations. Lets also discard that there was evidence for a lot of the democrats investigations. These things aren't equal, but for sake of argument lets assume they are. Can we agree that if someone in power does something illegal they should be prosecuted? I'm fine with this. Its not like its a new phenomenon that the opposite party does congressional hearings on something the other side did. Now should we judge the validity of these investigations in our voting decisions? Absolutely. When Republicans in the house do very little legislating but a lot of time on Biden investigation and one of their main sources ends up not being legitimate, we should frown at this. I will say while I'm hand waving it away for now, that I do think the president should be above this, so Trump doing as president vs non president Democrats isn't equal.

But again, for the sake of argument lets assume both sides are equal. Does this give Trump the right to overturn an election? NO NO NO NO. Again, don't try to justify. There isn't one. You aren't the first person in history trying to justify overturning a government. 

I will say this is a classic authoritarian tactic to accuse others of things you are doing yourself. You just ignore that it isn't equal or any evidence, but as long as you can persuade people its the same it doesn't matter what facts are.

[greenline]

Greenline
We do know that pressure came from the Biden administration to discard or pass favorable judgments on cases relating to Hunter Biden.

Source? 

Your red hering again. See first quote. 

For sake of argument, lets assume the direct evidence we have that Trump was pressuring for Biden investigations is equal to other Democrats who aren't the president of the united states doing investigations. Lets also discard that there was evidence for a lot of the democrats investigations. These things aren't equal, but for sake of argument lets assume they are. Can we agree that if someone in power does something illegal they should be prosecuted? I'm fine with this. Its not like its a new phenomenon that the opposite party does congressional hearings on something the other side did. Now should we judge the validity of these investigations in our voting decisions? Absolutely. When Republicans in the house do very little legislating but a lot of time on Biden investigation and one of their main sources ends up not being legitimate, we should frown at this. I will say while I'm hand waving it away for now, that I do think the president should be above this, so Trump doing as president vs non president Democrats isn't equal.

But again, for the sake of argument lets assume both sides are equal. Does this give Trump the right to overturn an election? NO NO NO NO. Again, don't try to justify. There isn't one. You aren't the first person in history trying to justify overturning a government. 

Per Missouri vs Biden, the department of Homeland Security was involved in giving 'suggestions' to social media and news organizations to cover up or downplay various matters, including Hunter Biden's infamous laptop. One can only imagine what else the administration has been getting up to that hasn't made it to the supreme court.

The prosecution of a people's representative is a matter that should only be approached with great care and delicacy. Taking money from and imprisoning someone who represents the population necessarily means taking away money and power that population can use to defend themselves or represent themselves. Trump has openly declared his intent to fight for domination of the government, but the Democratic party has effectively done the same by decreeing exactly what kind of president the Republicans are or are not allowed to run. We should also not forget that Trump is far less authoritarian than previous celebrated presidents have been. At no point has he tried to imprison Supreme Court justices (like Lincoln), or throw groups of war protestors in jail (Wilson). What Trump has done only looks apocalyptic to braindead students of the WWII curriculum where history starts in the year 1945.

[Mjmd]

AH the old "we don't want his penis pictures out there" / "we don't want people to die from vaccine misinformation". While yes I would agree this is an issue, you can see how it isn't equal hopefully? You also are then committing the slipperiest of slippery slope fallacies. AH HA they did something minor, THAT MEANS THERE IS MUCH BIGGER OUT THERE!!!! Without ever proving a bigger issue.

Did he commit the crimes? It is bad to unjustifyingly investigate a political opponent. Again, how many times have D's and Rs done house investigations into each other. We should judge them according to merit. MERIT mind you. However, if a politian has good evidence of committing crimes they should be investigated and tried. Are crimes ok if people vote to keep the criminal in office? Are some people above the law?

I would argue trying to overturn an election is greater than both those examples by magnitudes.

[greenline]

Did he commit the crimes? It is bad to unjustifyingly investigate a political opponent. Again, how many times have D's and Rs done house investigations into each other. We should judge them according to merit. MERIT mind you. However, if a politian has good evidence of committing crimes they should be investigated and tried. Are crimes ok if people vote to keep the criminal in office? Are some people above the law?

How the system should work to justify its own premises:

The class of elected representatives, so long as they work to represent the factions of the people, are above all but the most serious of crimes (murder, arson, etc). This is done with the understanding that the mere scandal of such things being publicly revealed is enough to potentially damage their credibility. All sides understand that if one side criminalizes the political class for all petty crimes, it has the opportunity to seize power utterly. In this scenario, Trump, Biden, the Clintons, the Obamas, the Bushes, they are above the law.

How the system is currently working:

Biden and the Clintons and the Obamas are above the law. Trump is being raked with a comb for every miniscule, petty possible violation of the law, essentially being convicted for anti-SovietAmerican agitation. Such investigations have not yet gone after moderate, respectable Republicans, but those politicians have no assurances that they will not be next if Trump is goosed.

[Mjmd]

Yes its a good thing Biden and his family hasn't been under investigation since before the first election and Trump didn't directly pressure this. I wonder if there was a lengthy Benghazi investigation before Hilary's election. The absolute hypocrisy you ignore is STAGGERING. That being said, I've said it before and I'll say it again. I'm fine if the DOJ independently investigates crimes of ANY official. We should 100% be judgmental of any political investigations or any KNOWN interference in the DOJ (which you seem to conveniently ignore).

And I VERY much disagree that elected officials should be above any crimes fyi (including bribery SIGH supreme court). If there is evidence I would be fine with all three going to jail. And mind you you've admitted Trump tried a coup. That is NOT a minor crime. If I don't know the UK had a leader who tried to overthrow the government and they then put that person back up for election with no consequences what would you think?

I will state it again and again and again and again. Whatever perceived issues you think there are (even if you had evidence which you seem to constantly lack) it doesn't justify trying to overturn an election. This is why I like using the Andrew Jackson example. A) its old so modern politics doesn't play and B) its pretty clear. He got majority of popular and electoral votes by quite a bit, but not over 50%. The political elite didn't like him and used congress to make another candidate president. AND YET he chose not to try to overturn it. Republicans feel they are being persecuted ect or whatever other grievances FINE. Take it to the public next election. HOWEVER, even real instead of perceived grievances would not be enough to justify trying to overturn an election. Again, Republicans do a lot of voter suppression, does that give Democrats the right to overturn an election? Should they overturn because the electoral college is antiquated and they always win the popular vote? Don't fall into the trap of trying to justify something that isn't justifiable. Both sides can always make that argument. Again, the weirdest thing about a democracy is we just let it happen. Its SOOO WEIRD in human history. I really don't think people understand how weird of an idea Democracy is.

So before you respond again. Think to yourself "is this more egregious than the election of 1824"? Is it worse than all the terrible injustices people have fought to slowly overcome in our democracy? Is it worse than direct voter suppression? To overturn an election you have to have a VERY high bar to pass. If you can't prove the above, just admit you WANT it, not that its justified.

[greenline]

Yes its a good thing Biden and his family hasn't been under investigation since before the first election and Trump didn't directly pressure this. I wonder if there was a lengthy Benghazi investigation before Hilary's election. The absolute hypocrisy you ignore is STAGGERING. That being said, I've said it before and I'll say it again. I'm fine if the DOJ independently investigates crimes of ANY official. We should 100% be judgmental of any political investigations or any KNOWN interference in the DOJ (which you seem to conveniently ignore).

There have been investigations, yes. As I've pointed out, they amounted to little. Hillary was forgiven of any charges, Biden was excused. It is one valid interpretation of being above the law.

The Trump conviction has proven, plain as day, that the department of justice within New York is a complete joke without any proven interference. The insistence that one should only care if the executive branch happens to be nudging the DOJ and that the DOJ should otherwise be given enthusiastic trust is retarded. No one should be persecuted for anti-Soviet agitation regardless of whether the executive branch wanted it.

Anyway, you are getting really mad and agitated about how Trump's coup-like attempt is a bad violation of norms, because apparently the only worthwhile thing about democracy is that it ensures a peaceful transition of power, rather than freedom of speech, a good economy, low crime, or other nice things. I am really not sure how Trump's plan implied a violation of this, because Trump had no plans for violence within his 'coup'. The electors would just make him the president, and the country would continue as normal, without hundreds of people being rounded up and shot. If the goal is merely to avoid this violence at all costs, then Biden administration is doing a lot more to overstep such norms by being so eager to engage in the rounding people up part.

[Mjmd]

If Trump was 100% right and would 100% be a better president it would still be the correct thing to vote against him because he tried to overturn the last election. I don't believe this, but even IF. Again, I've never said you can't have effective autocrats, but I've argued extensively democracies are better in the long run.

Democracies RELY on a transfer of power. Once you've broken that you've broken the democracy. The nice thing about an intact democracy is that you can VOTE depending on other issues. Remember, in a democracy one side ALWAYS thinks it has the best answers. ALWAYS. The weird thing is we let the people we think ARE WRONG take over. I think Trump was the 3rd worst president BEFORE he tried to overturn our election (corruption ect). You think he was the greatest thing ever. How do we determine who is in charge? VOTING and a really flawed electoral college system that for some reason one side still goes along with every election because that is the system we have. Because that is the right thing to do.

Edit: again you are trying to justify. What makes x issue you put forward than any other election in US history? What makes it worth breaking the system? Again, its ALWAYS easy to justify taking power.

[greenline]

If the ability to vote is what matters, I'm not sure why you are complaining. In the year 2024 AD, you get to vote. You get to help decide which side of the American polity gets to face political persecution. You are the praetorian guard, voting on who gets to be emperor. Some part of the government even had the sense of humor to joke about it: https://www.whitehousegiftshop.com/produ...strump.htm .

What makes x issue you put forward than any other election in US history?

A more interesting question. The violence of the Civil War was certainly more imperiling to the US systems at the time. Why did people (well, northerners) not lose their faith? Ultimately, I would put it down to that the 'pie', that is, the productive side of the economy, was still growing then. People are losing faith in US norms and the old regime now because the pie has been shrinking for a while. Nobody with sense believes firmly that the world their children and grandchildren will grow up in will be richer and better off than the world they live in today. What we sometimes call wokeness is one 'solution' to the pie shrinking: just take all the money from white people and give it to non whites! I believe Czechoslovakia tried something similar, right before it imploded.

[Mjmd]

I'm not complaining, I'm pleading with people to vote like our democracy depends on it.

So again you believe "x" thing. We can debate that "x" thing. I can disagree on "x" thing. Candidate 1 can endorse "x" thing and candidate 2 can endorse "y" thing. If candidate 2 wins should all the people who believe x support candidate 1 in overthrowing candidate 2? Every election one side can argue the other side is leading us wrong. EVERY SINGLE ELECTION. The absolute madness of democracies is WE DON'T try to change the result and instead accept it. That is the norm that has been broken. Any Republican who thinks differently at least thinks so aloud is now out of the party. That is the difference this time. Robin Vos who is the Wisconsin GOP house leader has been primaried and is now on his 2nd recall not because he has been a vocal critic, but merely because he hasn't done ENOUGH. He hasn't done exactly as told by Trump. That is not normal. Its not normal for one party to have a primary defining tenant that its ok to overturn an election and if you haven't done enough in that effort you are out. That is what is dangerous and different this time.