Scrutable

When you’re that rich, surely you can afford better fake tan than from Poundland?

It's pretty obvious he keeps being a c.nt to his make up artists and valets - they continually let him walk out the door looking like a demented old man.

Vertigowooyay wrote: ↑

Sat Dec 21, 2019 11:02 am

When you’re that rich, surely you can afford better fake tan than from Poundland?

2C975E6F-1483-40EC-8E04-DAD7887686B4.jpeg

It's overspill from the sh.t eating grin.

lpm wrote: ↑

Sat Dec 21, 2019 11:43 am

It's pretty obvious he keeps being a c.nt to his make up artists and valets - they continually let him walk out the door looking like a demented old man.

More speech for your observations about his mental decline:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UE9BXkQ-SRc

They are running a little competition back stage - who can send him out with the most ludicrous make-up without him knowing.

lpm wrote: ↑

Sun Dec 22, 2019 2:53 pm

They are running a little competition back stage - who can send him out with the most ludicrous make-up without him knowing.

https://twitter.com/TomJChicago/status/ ... 76352?s=20
talking about that photo in particular

Trump’s list of dementia symptoms include grooming issues. The costumey effect of caking on makeup is common w/ patients. It’s uncommon to be in public creating a spectacle w/ one’s appearance. His family is a disgrace. (Confirmed this photo was real b4 unloading). It gets worse.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/201 ... SApp_Other

Watch for the shoulder twitch at about 2 seconds in:

https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1208881761855397888

He mainly just seems to be speaking to his own audience there though. He makes a joke about orange being his favourite colour ffs.

discovolante wrote: ↑

Mon Dec 23, 2019 9:22 pm

He mainly just seems to be speaking to his own audience there though. He makes a joke about orange being his favourite colour ffs.

Well, it is the new black. In a perfect world.

Trump is a white demagogue. It’s ineffective to impeach a white demagogue by colorblindness because colorblindness further entrenches whiteness, and that is pathetic.

https://medium.com/@SamMcKenzieJr/the-c ... 138bc2feca

I was having similar thoughts, but I am not as eloquent as this author.

Herainestold wrote: ↑

Mon Dec 23, 2019 11:05 pm

Trump is a white demagogue. It’s ineffective to impeach a white demagogue by colorblindness because colorblindness further entrenches whiteness, and that is pathetic.

https://medium.com/@SamMcKenzieJr/the-c ... 138bc2feca

I was having similar thoughts, but I am not as eloquent as this author.

I got this far...

There’s no way to impeach Trump without impeaching whiteness because Trump is thoroughly white

...before calling bollocks on it and giving up. And that's the start of the second paragraph.

Vertigowooyay wrote: ↑

Mon Dec 23, 2019 6:27 pm

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/201 ... SApp_Other

EB9AD03C-F783-4643-AFFD-3EFC9A64C05D.png

The Guardian illustration of Trump at the charge against windmills is manifestly wrong: He was wielding a golf club, not a spear. And riding a cart not an old-fashioned horse.

GeenDienst wrote: ↑

Tue Dec 24, 2019 9:07 am

Herainestold wrote: ↑

Mon Dec 23, 2019 11:05 pm

Trump is a white demagogue. It’s ineffective to impeach a white demagogue by colorblindness because colorblindness further entrenches whiteness, and that is pathetic.

https://medium.com/@SamMcKenzieJr/the-c ... 138bc2feca

I was having similar thoughts, but I am not as eloquent as this author.

I got this far...

There’s no way to impeach Trump without impeaching whiteness because Trump is thoroughly white

...before calling bollocks on it and giving up. And that's the start of the second paragraph.

The Trump presidency is the culmination of the white supremacy and whiteness that is one of the ordering principles of American society and always has been. It was brushed under the rug during the Obama administration but it has since reared its ugly head.

Impeachment is actually aiding Trumps popularity as threatened white supremacists rally to the flag of their leader.He is very likely to to be re-elected.

The silver lining is that that the foolish and incompetent Trump government, is quickly reducing Americas power, prestige and influence in the rest of the world. The biggest imperialist colonialist country is on the decline and the countries of the world are able to come in to their own. Good luck to them.

Still bollocks. For all the crimes committed on blacks and other races, being white is not a breach of the US constitution. And Trumpy is not being impeached for furthring the cause of white nativism.

GeenDienst wrote: ↑

Fri Dec 27, 2019 10:33 am

Still bollocks. For all the crimes committed on blacks and other races, being white is not a breach of the US constitution. And Trumpy is not being impeached for furthring the cause of white nativism.

The acts that Trump is being impeached for resulted from a white supremacist belief that no matter what he did, his whiteness would protect him. And he is correct. It is going to protect him.

Even more bollocks. His actions stem from him being a c.nt, and the protection his senators give him has f.ck all to do with white supremacy. Come up with an impeachment charge that involves white supremacy, orgive it the f.ck up. This racial guilt trip stuff is simply crap. Trump is being impeached, or I missed Pelosi's charges againt the entire white population.

Herainestold wrote: ↑

Mon Dec 23, 2019 11:05 pm

Trump is a white demagogue. It’s ineffective to impeach a white demagogue by colorblindness because colorblindness further entrenches whiteness, and that is pathetic.

https://medium.com/@SamMcKenzieJr/the-c ... 138bc2feca

I was having similar thoughts, but I am not as eloquent as this author.

"impeachment by colorblindness" ffs. There is a point at the heart of it somewhere, but it really needs thinking through and aiming at the right targets. And as a colourblind person, I find the use of the term when discussing things related to race mildly annoying. Not offensive, just mildly annoying.

bmforre wrote: ↑

Tue Dec 24, 2019 9:16 am

Vertigowooyay wrote: ↑

Mon Dec 23, 2019 6:27 pm

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/201 ... SApp_Other

EB9AD03C-F783-4643-AFFD-3EFC9A64C05D.png

The Guardian illustration of Trump at the charge against windmills is manifestly wrong: He was wielding a golf club, not a spear. And riding a cart not an old-fashioned horse.

Plus it was an offshore, electricity generating windmill in Scotland.

So the acquittal is going to start next week.

Meanwhile...

The irony is that Trump is now impatient for his own Senate trial to start, which he reasonably expects will bring the public more to his side. During the House’s impeachment proceedings, Trump’s approval ratings rose six points.

GeenDienst wrote: ↑

Fri Jan 10, 2020 7:10 pm

So the acquittal is going to start next week.

Meanwhile...

The irony is that Trump is now impatient for his own Senate trial to start, which he reasonably expects will bring the public more to his side. During the House’s impeachment proceedings, Trump’s approval ratings rose six points.

That's massively confounded by the holiday period in the US though, when it gets even harder than usual for pollsters to reach people with jobs and who travel. It's also not true according to the 538 averages.

Trump's approval rating today is 41.9%. The highest it's been in the past two months is 43.8%. In May, it was 41.9%. It's been within 2.5 percent of 41.5% since the end of the shutdown in January 2019.

GeenDienst wrote: ↑

Fri Jan 10, 2020 7:10 pm

So the acquittal is going to start next week.

Meanwhile...

The irony is that Trump is now impatient for his own Senate trial to start, which he reasonably expects will bring the public more to his side. During the House’s impeachment proceedings, Trump’s approval ratings rose six points.

It's weird that there's such a widespread view that it's all simple - Trump will be acquitted and that's that. Particularly in the sh.t BBC coverage and other UK media.

It's complex with loads of unknown variables.

- do Mitt Romney and Susan Collins side with the Democrats for a proper trial? It only takes 4 Republicans - how much sway does Romney have?
- how does Chief Justice John Roberts to the false oaths and a faked trial?
- what other cards does Pelosi have to play in a faked trial?
- is there something partial between a genuine trial and a faked trial?
- how does Murdoch play it?
- how will public opinion change in a faked trial?
- in a genuine trial, how resolute can Senators be in voting to acquit given how straightforward the crimes and evidence are?

Behind all of it is the question of Trump's health: will Republicans decide to fight 2020 with President Pence instead of clinging on to a mad f.cker with dementia? Do they risk the Senate 2020 fight simply to protect someone they know is a criminal and personally hate, and who might fall or be confused in public?

You are aware that it needs a 2/3 supermajority to remove him, aren't you?

The Senate now has 53 Republicans, 45 Democrats and two independents who usually vote with the Democrats. Conviction and removal of a president would require 67 votes. So, for Trump to be removed from office via impeachment, at least 20 Republicans and all the Democrats and independents would have to vote against him.

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/09/24/what-it ... trump.html

It takes a supermajority to convict. The procedures for the trial are Senate rules and only have to be approved by a simple majority.

GeenDienst wrote: ↑

Sat Jan 11, 2020 3:40 pm

You are aware that it needs a 2/3 supermajority to remove him, aren't you?

The Senate now has 53 Republicans, 45 Democrats and two independents who usually vote with the Democrats. Conviction and removal of a president would require 67 votes. So, for Trump to be removed from office via impeachment, at least 20 Republicans and all the Democrats and independents would have to vote against him.

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/09/24/what-it ... trump.html

Majorities have a tendency to appear suddenly as members of a party try to project unity, and because of groupthink.

If the House adds charges of something like undertaking military operations without Congressional authorization (the Yemen drone assassination, for example), then Mike Lee and Rand Paul might have serious thoughts about voting to convict. Add in the 6 or so vulnerable R senators up for re-election in 2020 who may well lose if there's a real trial with evidence and they don't vote to convict, and you are getting to a real, but insufficient, majority voting to convict.

That'll seriously worry the party loyalists, and things _may_ snowball. It's not necessarily the most likely outcome, but it's more plausible.