US Politics: 2 Fash 2 Impeach

[Week]

(The article is from 2019 ... )

[Lollygag]

Fox News is cutting away from impeachment coverage which means this info won't get through at all to many on the right.

https://www.rawstory.com/fox-news-not-showing-impeachment/

-------------------------------------------------------------

https://www.mediamatters.org/steve-bannon/extremists-and-qanon-supporters-are-organizing-message-boards-take-over-republican

Quote

Extremists and QAnon supporters are organizing on message boards to take over the Republican Party

 

Former Trump adviser Steve Bannon's recent interview with a local Republican Party committee member on how Trump supporters might be able to take control of the party at the grassroots level is now being enthusiastically promoted on far-right platforms — including to followers of the QAnon conspiracy theory, which has been linked to domestic terrorism and the January 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol.

On February 6, Bannon hosted Dan Schultz, an attorney and a local GOP committee member from Arizona, on his podcast to discuss conservatives taking over the Republican Party by becoming the local precinct committee officers throughout the country as many of these positions are vacant from lack of public awareness. From there, according to Schultz, they could gain influence over local elected officials and even determine the course of national presidential nominations.

Bannon’s interview with Schultz caught further attention, with social media posts appearing on far-right platforms 4chan, Patriots.win, and Gab. These posts especially focused on the claim by Bannon and Schultz that 200,000 local committee slots nationwide — roughly half of the total seats — currently stand empty and could be filled easily, potentially even by running unopposed. Some of the posts touted this as “The Best Kept Secret to taking over the Republican (GOP) Party.”

...

During the interview, Schultz spoke of the power and influence that comes from local committees at the grassroots level in speaking to politicians, and organizing votes in the primary elections that those local candidates must first win. Also key, Schultz explained, is the election of delegates and party officials higher up the line.

“You'll also elect the delegates to the four-year state presidential nominating convention. The delegates there that you've elected — and you can run for delegate — only the precinct committeemen elect the delegates,” Schultz said. “The delegates elect the national convention delegates directly, and then they also elect the national committeeman and the national committeewoman to a four-year term on the RNC. That's real political power. We can take over the party if we invade it.”

...

“And I've told people this since 2009. I told the tea partyers this,” Schultz added. “If you will not at least try this, and get involved, and take over the party, I can't guarantee you that we'll save the republic, but I can guarantee you this: We'll lose it. If we conservatives don't take over the Republican Party, we're going to lose our republic.”

Bannon also emphasized the importance of what Schultz was saying by commenting, “This is the ability to take over the Republican Party, because this is where the votes are. It’s a pyramid, and this is the base of the pyramid.”

Bannon previously made numerous calls for former President Donald Trump to subvert the results of the 2020 election. He also compared pro-Trump protests after the elections to the American Revolution and on January 5, said that “all hell is going to break loose tomorrow” when the Electoral College votes were going to get counted. (Since then, he has tried to downplay the violence that took place that day — while also urging Trump’s impeachment legal team to continue pursuing the false claims that the election was stolen.)

 

 

Notice how much of this rhetoric resembles what we're seeing in the impeachment hearing.

Sorry for the quote bomb.

[Mindwalker]

 

[Kalbear]

1 hour ago, The Anti-Targ said:

I dunno whether I want to see Trump barred from holding office in the future through this political process. That just turns him into a martyr and a victim of oppression by the "deep state" for those that continue to cleave to his personality cult, and it makes them possibly more dangerous.  I would rather seem him try again, and fail, and for that to be the end of his participation in the political sphere. Or for him to be convicted, through the judicial system, for the kinds of crimes that make you ineligible to vote or be a candidate.

Also it's not like cutting off the head of the Hydra is going to kill the Hydra. The whole Hydra falling into a pit of molten lava is what kills the Hydra.

The converse to this is that it is not remotely a safe bet that he'll fail. ESPECIALLY if he's not held responsible for anything. 

[Kalbear]

2 minutes ago, Mindwalker said:

 

2024 is a Looooooong time from now. They can say this all they want to, but there's nothing that requires them to enforce it. 

[Kalbear]

Definitely watch the Nickelodeon stream

 

 

[DMC]

3 minutes ago, KalbearAnon said:

2024 is a Looooooong time from now. They can say this all they want to, but there's nothing that requires them to enforce it. 

Uh, it'd still be pretty stupid to publicly announce it if they don't intend to enforce it.

[Kalbear]

Just now, DMC said:

Uh, it'd still be pretty stupid to publicly announce it if they don't intend to enforce it.

Sorry, are you accusing Twitter of having a reasonable, logical and good public facing policy? 

I agree it'd be stupid. Stupid ain't binding though. 

[DMC]

1 minute ago, KalbearAnon said:

I agree it'd be stupid. Stupid ain't binding though. 

Who said it was binding?  You seem to be suggesting they don't intend to enforce it, and I don't see any reason to think they won't.  Other than the obvious that, yeah, lots can change in three years.

[Kalbear]

Just now, DMC said:

Who said it was binding?  You seem to be suggesting they don't intend to enforce it, and I don't see any reason to think they won't.  Other than the obvious that, yeah, lots can change in three years.

I don't think they will because Twitter is run by dumbasses who change course as soon as the politics do and have about zero actual principles. I think as soon as they get even the slightest amount of pressure to give him back his account, especially if he starts running again (which he'll probably do in about two weeks), they'll give it back to him.

And people will complain about it, and say that they have a shitty system and their announcement was wrong, and that'll be that.

[Mindwalker]

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/538302-gop-senators-appear-to-pay-half-hearted-attention-to-trial-drawing-criticism

GOP senators draw criticism for appearing to pay half-hearted attention to impeachment trial

Thanks to the last recess, I'm almst caught up. They seem to be doing 8 hour sessions.

 

[DMC]

2 minutes ago, KalbearAnon said:

I think as soon as they get even the slightest amount of pressure to give him back his account, especially if he starts running again (which he'll probably do in about two weeks), they'll give it back to him.

You don't think they've already been pressured to give him back his account?

[The Anti-Targ]

The USDA 97th Agricultural outlook forum is coming up and for the first time it is virtual, open and free. So I imagine for most of you this will be the first, and possibly only, time you can attend.

https://www.usda.gov/oce/ag-outlook-forum.

Quote

Invitation to attend

USDA’s 97^th Agricultural Outlook Forum

 Dear FAS Colleagues:

 We invite you to USDA’s 97^th Agricultural Outlook Forum (AOF), “Building on Innovation: A Pathway to Resilience”, held February 18-19. The AOF will be virtual due to COVID-19, and registration is open and free. Please find the AOF program and registration information at https://www.usda.gov/oce/ag-outlook-forum.

 The AOF is USDA’s oldest and largest annual gathering, and it is organized by USDA’s Office of the Chief Economist and USDA agencies. During the Forum, USDA’s Chief Economist unveils USDA’s Outlook for the domestic agricultural economy and trade for the year. Forum sessions explore a wide range of current and emerging topics in agriculture related to global trade, innovations in agriculture, developments in animal and crop biotechnology and commodity markets. Additionally, a virtual exhibit hall will showcase resources from USDA agencies and private organizations.

 This year, FAS will be hosting the following two sessions. We hope you are able to attend!

 1:30 p.m. (EST) Thursday, February 18 - U.S. Trade Agenda

USDA Agricultural Trade Policy Priorities and Efforts to Grow Foreign Markets. This session will focus on the latest developments impacting U.S. agricultural trade, including FAS priorities and new initiatives.

 Moderator: Sharon Sydow, Senior Economist, Office of the Chief Economist, Washington, DC

 Trade Agenda in a New Administration

Speaker: Chad P. Bown, Reginald Jones Senior Fellow, Peterson Institute for International Economics, Washington, DC

 Trade Policy Opportunities for U.S. Agriculture

Speaker: Jason Hafemeister, Secretary’s Trade Counsel, Trade and Foreign Agricultural Affairs, Washington, DC

 3:00 p.m. (EST) Thursday, February 18: China: Trends and Driving Forces of a Dynamic Agricultural Market

State of the trade landscape in China, the world’s largest agricultural import market. Speakers will discuss latest developments in the Chinese market impacting U.S. agricultural exports, including China’s current economy, China’s rapid recovery from African Swine Fever (ASF) and the steady increase in demand for beef, and China’s supply and prices of feed grains, among others.

 Moderator: Daniel Whitley, Administrator (Acting), Foreign Agricultural Service, Washington, DC

 China’s Economy and Geopolitical Landscape — What’s Going on Now

Speaker: David Dollar, Senior Fellow - Foreign Policy, Global Economy and Development, Brookings Institution, John L. Thornton China Center, Washington, DC

 U.S./China Trade Prospects — A Short-Term Outlook

Speaker: Jason Hafemeister, Secretary’s Trade Counsel, Trade and Foreign Agricultural Affairs, Washington, DC

 China’s Animal Protein Market and Feed Demand — The Long-Term Outlook

Speaker: Dr. Fred Gale, Senior Economist, Economic Research Service, Washington, DC

 For all Registration-related inquiries (including special accommodations) please call 703-925-9455, x133 or toll free 1-844-430-7073, x133 or email [email protected].

 Registration is free but required to access the Forum sessions. After registering, if you do not receive your confirmation email, please check your spam folder first, then contact [email protected].

 For questions related to FAS’s sessions, please contact Javier Fajardo at [email protected].

Unfortunately the timing sucks for me since the programme runs from 2AM to 11AM, and day 2 is Saturday.

The good thing is that one session that sounds really cool, that is during a time when I am awake is "Controlled Environment Agriculture Innovation on Earth and Beyond". Though it has no relevance to my professional role, so I would probably have to choose a competing session like "China: Trends and Driving Forces of a Dynamic Agricultural Market". But if one of you wanted to go to the farming in space session and report back here that would be awesome.

[Kalbear]

Just now, DMC said:

You don't think they've already been pressured to give him back his account?

Not effectively, yet. I think once we will show that Trump is not impeachable and he did nothing wrong and was totally exonerated etc, there will be a LOT more call to give him back his megaphone - probably by some moderate dems too. As we get past covid, assuming that ever happens, it's even more likely that this occurs. We're at the appeasement stage of the authoritarian takeover now.

[The Anti-Targ]

19 minutes ago, KalbearAnon said:

The converse to this is that it is not remotely a safe bet that he'll fail. ESPECIALLY if he's not held responsible for anything. 

Hopefully that's what the criminal indictments for his shady business crap would do. If he's convicted in open court for any of that stuff his chances of being elected to anything other than the Mar-a-Largo town council (if that's a thing) are shot.

[Mindwalker]

https://twitter.com/jaketapper/status/1359649714745053185

@BenSasse

saying WH officials told him Trump was "delighted" watching the attack;

 

[DMC]

2 minutes ago, KalbearAnon said:

Not effectively, yet.

I just think your logic here is amusing.  So let's assume Twitter is run by feckless amoral executives that will change course due to any public pressure.  I know shit about them, but I'm perfectly willing to accept that.  There's still going to be pressure both to uphold and overturn the ban - likely in somewhat equal quantity and even intensity.  And the most likely thing you do by affirming the ban is permanent - as opposed to remaining ambiguous - is increase the pressure on you to do so.

[Mindwalker]

5 minutes ago, The Anti-Targ said:

Hopefully that's what the criminal indictments for his shady business crap would do. If he's convicted in open court for any of that stuff his chances of being elected to anything other than the Mar-a-Largo town council (if that's a thing) are shot.

Don't hold your breath. He's gotten away with so much, I'll believe it when I see it.

[The Anti-Targ]

The reality is, regardless of any evidence and testimony he's not getting convicted in the senate. expecting 17 republicans to turn on him to that degree is just a bridge too far. It should be regarded as a win just to get someone other than Mittens to vote to convict. So if you are going to hope for something to practically, if not legally, prevent him from ever getting elected or appointed to a meaningful political position then those indictments are your only hope.

[Larry of the Lawn]

10 minutes ago, DMC said:

I just think your logic here is amusing.  So let's assume Twitter is run by feckless amoral executives that will change course due to any public pressure.  I know shit about them, but I'm perfectly willing to accept that.  There's still going to be pressure both to uphold and overturn the ban - likely in somewhat equal quantity and even intensity.  And the most likely thing you do by affirming the ban is permanent - as opposed to remaining ambiguous - is increase the pressure on you to do so.

Just judging by twitters past behavior I'd say they will err on the side of techbro-libertarian both sides-ism and if he's not convicted, will give him the account back by this summer.  Especially if he runs for office again (I don't think he will).