The Big Idiot President Is Not Getting Himself Impeached On Purpose, C'mon

[Pete F.]

"Donald Trump is not trying to get impeached. He does not want to be impeached, and he definitely does not have a sophisticated dastardly plot to turn his impeachment into greater personal power or as a strategy to create a more solidified and motivated political base. He does not have a sophisticated dastardly plot to do anything, or any other kind of plot. The man is not capable of sophistication, or any but the basest sensation-seeking dastardliness; it’s all he can do to get the fast food from its cardboard container to the appropriate face-hole. He is a big stupid idiot, is what I am saying, and he likes things that feel good and wants them right now and doesn’t like things that don’t feel good and doesn’t want them ever, and that is the extent of him.

Donald Trump has been portraying himself, accurately, as a degenerate, penny-ante dullard for his entire life. When he opens his mouth, when he talks about himself: “I am a degenerate, penny-ante dullard” is the only thing he can say. When he insists he is actually a tremendously smart man, he is saying “I’m a degenerate, penny-ante dullard.” When he says Buy these fabulous mail-order steaks, really truly high-class steaks, many people, fabulous, do we love them, you hear them saying Trump—big guys, tough, they’re saying—you know, Trump, does he have the best steaks or what, he is saying “I’m a degenerate, penny-ante dullard.” When he makes business decisions, when he makes dinner orders, when he attempts to stand up as normal humans do, when he combs his hair: he has made of himself and of his life a monument to the smallness of his perspective and intellect and character. Because he is a soft, breathless, foam-boned inheritance baby with a brain like a wet saltine cracker, because he has been crippled and made monstrous by money and endless permission and therefore cannot conceive of there being any truth or morality beyond what he wants right now, he never knows that this is what he’s doing and also never will. That’s exactly why it’s the only thing he has ever done.

None of this is a part of some scheme. There is never a scheme. He is not sandbagging. He is not playing four-dimensional chess. Donald Trump is not capable of four-dimensional chess. Put Donald Trump in a thumb war against a department-store mannequin and he will be lucky to escape with a draw. He will call it victory. What’s infinitely depressing is how many of his nominal political opponents will believe him.

The weirdest, saddest, and most unhelpful people, maybe in all the world, are: boomer liberals (like the leadership of the Democratic party, for example) who look upon Donald Trump’s lifelong track record of failing at petty crook #^&#^&#^&#^&—doing petty crook #^&#^&#^&#^& and not only getting away with it but in many cases declaring his failure a great success, and then being rewarded with greater fame and stature in turn—and insist they are seeing the work of a mastermind, rather than the tides of American life and culture carrying yet another born-rich #^&#^&#^&#^&-for-brains white #^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^& past and above any and all demands and consequences. The idea of Trump is the sucker-ass belief in meritocracy, in hoary old Great Man bull#^&#^&#^&#^&, twisted into its most horrible gargoyle incarnation. He’s rich and famous, he’s the president of the country, and therefore it just simply must be the case that he has earned this station for himself, one way or another, via some expression of traits that make him equal to it. He has to be some kind of genius, even if it’s the evil kind. There is no way that a braying worthless dope, a man with no qualities of any kind to recommend him, could have ended up where Trump has ended up.

And now that investigations into Donald Trump’s campaign and also into his efforts to thwart and obstruct those same investigations—investigations about which he has been in a panicky and very public rage since well before his inauguration—have moved him into the crosshairs of impeachment, the meritocracy dead-enders in the opposition party believe that this must be happening because he wills it. His almost comically brazen and plainly illegal attempts to silence, discredit, and outright threaten the people doing and/or cooperating with the investigations must reflect some active and strategic desire to be impeached. He must be laying a trap: If Congress impeaches him, he will not be mad, he will be laughing actually. The alternative is that the very obviously hopelessly dimwitted lifelong failure currently sitting atop a pile of inherited and/or pilfered cash in the most powerful office on earth is precisely as stupid and balloon-handed and incompetent as he has spent his entire adult life proving himself to be. America just doesn’t work like that.

That’s the thing being fought over, ultimately. The question of whether to impeach Donald Trump is, among other things, the question of how to defeat him. The question of how to defeat him is, among other things, the question of what he really is in the first place: Is he just Donald Trump The Illiterate Racist Sex Clown or is he the Republican Party or is he the deeper and more fundamental articles of American life and history? That, in turn, is the question of what kind of society this really is. Is it one in which vast material inequalities are mere flukes of circumstance, or is that situation the just allocation of reward, or is it the residue of systemic theft by a class of cruel moral dwarves, or what?

Which is to say: When you credit Donald Trump, in the absence of absolutely any evidence, with possessing the Mephistophelian cunning to bring about his own impeachment, deliberately, for the purpose of bringing to fruition some long-simmering plot to consolidate his political support, you are finally saying that you agree with him. Not just on the baseless claim that he’s actually in possession of one (1) Whole Adult Brain, but on his broader infantile idea of what kind of place this country is. He believes that he deserves what he has because he has it, and his every decision flows from that belief; he believes that being rich and famous, alone, is proof that he should be rich and famous. To see him as he sees himself—as a sinister mastermind—and treat him as he believes he should be treated is to agree with him on all that.

More than that, it’s believing in a world where Donald Trump surely must be three steps ahead of his opposition, precisely because he’s richer and more powerful and more famous than them. It’s believing that, because he got elected president even though other smart and rich people were trying to defeat him, he therefore must be the very best at all of this—better at it, surely, than the people who want to defeat him.

In which case, sure, oppose impeaching him. Why wouldn’t you want him to be president, anyway?"

Albert Burneko

[Jim in CT]

that piece says he’s not capable of sophistication.

What does that say, then, about Hilary? The idiotic, unsophisticated Trump, clobbered her in an election that no one said he could win.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Sea Dangles]

Thanks for using your skills to copy and paste somebody’s thought.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

that piece says he’s not capable of sophistication.

What does that say, then, about Hilary? The idiotic, unsophisticated Trump, clobbered her in an election that no one said he could win.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

What about?
Good fallback
Have no fear, he just said he’s an extremely stable genius.
I’m sure you were aware of that.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Sea Dangles

Thanks for using your skills to copy and paste somebody’s thought.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Once again, you’re welcome.
Just trying to broaden your horizons
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Once again, you’re welcome.
Just trying to broaden your horizons
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Broaden horizons with a baseless ad hominem rant? This is what you're reduced to?

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

What about?
Good fallback
Have no fear, he just said he’s an extremely stable genius.
I’m sure you were aware of that.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

so you can post Trump is an
idiot and incapable of sophisticated thought, and thats OK.

But when i respond with accurate examples of things he’s done that indicate the ability to solve an extremely complicated problem, then i am guilty of “whataboutism”.

in other words, i’m not allowed
to respond.

He won a presidential election against the most inevitable
candidate since Reagan’s second term, and he won in a rout, and he did it with the entire
media aligned against him.

He did something that no one said he could do, something on the national
stage. he solved a very complicated problem. it’s a very sophisticated achievement. thats what happened, whether you like it or not.

i’m not relying on the idiotic things he says, i’m basing my conclusions on what he does.

Lowest unemployment in 50 years? if that’s not a sign of being able to tackle sophisticated problems, how come no previous presidents pulled it off? sorry, is that more whataboutism?


Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

so you can post Trump is an
idiot and incapable of sophisticated thought, and thats OK.

But when i respond with accurate examples of things he’s done that indicate the ability to solve an extremely complicated problem, then i am guilty of “whataboutism”.

in other words, i’m not allowed
to respond.

He won a presidential election against the most inevitable
candidate since Reagan’s second term, and he won in a rout, and he did it with the entire
media aligned against him.
Faux and Breitbart are part of the media and certainly were not aligned against him

He did something that no one said he could do, something on the national
stage. he solved a very complicated problem. it’s a very sophisticated achievement. thats what happened, whether you like it or not.
With the help of the Russians


i’m not relying on the idiotic things he says, i’m basing my conclusions on what he does.

Lowest unemployment in 50 years? if that’s not a sign of being able to tackle sophisticated problems, how come no previous presidents pulled it off? sorry, is that more whataboutism?
Zero change in the graph of Unemployment since the early Obama days
https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS14000000
I know everything is harder for Trump


Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I'm concerned about the idiotic things he does in addition to the idiotic things he says.
Because of his lack of leadership for the first time in peacetime the Debt to GDP ratio is over 100%.
His failing trade war with China actually would have caused the trade imbalance to increase in Q1'19, but was saved from that by a swine flu epidemic in China that killed the majority of their pigs, they then bought US pigs. Maybe swine flu was brought by Trump to China.
Now Trump is giving 15 BILLION to us farmers to offset their losses from the tariffs, but he will have to keep doing it. The Chinese are helping their farmers to grow the products they need in their own country and also thru their Belt and Road initiative helping farmers in other countries. This market will be gone for some time in the future and we will have to find new markets.
Sooner or later he'll say: who knew being President was so complicated?

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by detbuch

Broaden horizons with a baseless ad hominem rant? This is what you're reduced to?

Some say it is just pure sarcasm, like Trump does.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

I'm concerned about the idiotic things he does in addition to the idiotic things he says.
Because of his lack of leadership for the first time in peacetime the Debt to GDP ratio is over 100%.
His failing trade war with China actually would have caused the trade imbalance to increase in Q1'19, but was saved from that by a swine flu epidemic in China that killed the majority of their pigs, they then bought US pigs. Maybe swine flu was brought by Trump to China.
Now Trump is giving 15 BILLION to us farmers to offset their losses from the tariffs, but he will have to keep doing it. The Chinese are helping their farmers to grow the products they need in their own country and also thru their Belt and Road initiative helping farmers in other countries. This market will be gone for some time in the future and we will have to find new markets.
Sooner or later he'll say: who knew being President was so complicated?

now you’re
moving the goalposts. i’m also concerned about the awful
things he says and does. but unlike you, i can give him credit when he does something great, like the economy. i’m not so driven by ideology that i have to reject facts in order to cling to my agenda.

the
evidence that russia helped trump, more than the media helped hilary, is what, exactly?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Some say it is just pure sarcasm, like Trump does.

Some say imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

His failing trade war with China actually would have caused the trade imbalance to increase in Q1'19, but was saved from that by a swine flu epidemic in China that killed the majority of their pigs, they then bought US pigs. Maybe swine flu was brought by Trump to China.Now Trump is giving 15 BILLION to us farmers to offset their losses from the tariffs, but he will have to keep doing it. The Chinese are helping their farmers to grow the products they need in their own country and also thru their Belt and Road initiative helping farmers in other countries. This market will be gone for some time in the future and we will have to find new markets.
Sooner or later he'll say: who knew being President was so complicated?

This is another interesting example of your thought process. So, if it hadn't been for the swine flue, China wouldn't have bought pigs from US farmers? So we have to depend on China's disasters in order to sell them stuff? That doesn't seem like a good formula for sustainable trade.

On top of that, China is helping its own farmers to fill the needs of the country--but it wouldn't be doing so if Trump wasn't slapping tariffs on goods from China? Oh, really? China would "help" farmers in other countries through its Belt and Road policy, but it wouldn't do so for its own farmers if Trump didn't impose tariffs? That's caca brain thinking. It's also naïve thinking that China's Belt and Road policy is some generous gesture or even an attempt to create beneficial cooperation with the rest of the world. If it were, it would certainly cooperate with the US in this beneficial cooperation. To think such a thing is merely to swallow China's propaganda.

"Belt and Road" is a slick trick to gain Chinese world dominance, and especially to replace the dominance of America with its own. It essentially seduces economically depressed countries into accepting its "help" and makes them dependent while it rapes their resources for its own use, and in the meantime gaining a "partner" in its drive to power. It's an extension, by other means, of taking out what little wealth those countries have as it has been transferring out whatever wealth it can from us by loaning us trillions of dollars while taking advantage of putting restrictive tariffs on American imports while not getting reciprocal treatment. And by "allowing" American manufactures to produce in China if they turn over the management and intellectual property of those businesses to China. (China's rape of America has given it the wealth and edge to make Belt and Road possible.) Even debt ridden European countries are considering accepting China's "help." Hey, after Trump destroys the US, then we could accept the help available in its Belt and Road.

Trump's "trade war" is about far more than fair trade.

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by detbuch

This is another interesting example of your thought process. So, if it hadn't been for the swine flue, China wouldn't have bought pigs from US farmers? So we have to depend on China's disasters in order to sell them stuff? That doesn't seem like a good formula for sustainable trade.

On top of that, China is helping its own farmers to fill the needs of the country--but it wouldn't be doing so if Trump wasn't slapping tariffs on goods from China? Oh, really? China would "help" farmers in other countries through its Belt and Road policy, but it wouldn't do so for its own farmers if Trump didn't impose tariffs? That's caca brain thinking. It's also naïve thinking that China's Belt and Road policy is some generous gesture or even an attempt to create beneficial cooperation with the rest of the world. If it were, it would certainly cooperate with the US in this beneficial cooperation. To think such a thing is merely to swallow China's propaganda.

"Belt and Road" is a slick trick to gain Chinese world dominance, and especially to replace the dominance of America with its own. It essentially seduces economically depressed countries into accepting its "help" and makes them dependent while it rapes their resources for its own use, and in the meantime gaining a "partner" in its drive to power. It's an extension, by other means, of taking out what little wealth those countries have as it has been transferring out whatever wealth it can from us by loaning us trillions of dollars. And by "allowing" American manufactures to produce in China if they turn over the management and intellectual property of those businesses to China. (China's rape of America has given it the wealth and edge to make Belt and Road possible.) Even debt ridden European countries are considering accepting China's "help." Hey, after Trump destroys the US, then we could accept the help available in its Belt and Road.

Trump's "trade war" is about far more than fair trade.

China would have had no need to buy our pigs without the swine flu and they bought them despite the tariff imposed by themselves.
Markets that are hurt by tariffs are not easily replaced.
Interesting that you find China's colonialism upsetting but find Trump's policys that enable it and take us out of the equation to be good.
Now it is time for golf.

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

.
Markets that are hurt by tariffs are not easily replaced.

Apparently, China doesn't understand that. It likes one way tariffs. Making tariffs bilateral may educate them. The one way tariff "market" in their favor is not sustainable for us. Scrapping it and/or replacing it would remove the hurt.

Interesting that you find China's colonialism upsetting but find Trump's policys that enable it and take us out of the equation to be good.
Now it is time for golf.

I don't consider the truth to be "upsetting," rather it is salutary. The present "equation" is politically and economically insane.

I'm with you on time for golf.