I agree with this article to the extent that having a Senate trial would, indeed, seem to portend disaster for Democrats. They would lose the all-important narrative during an election year. Yet Pelosi, by allowing the impeachment "inquiry" (or whatever it is) to go forward, mounted the tiger of impeachment, and it is difficult to see how she could dismount without being eaten.
I would also wonder whether Trump would agree to be censured. Yes, that would stop the impeachment drive but censure would still put a black mark next to his name and I am not sure he would allow that to happen. Honestly, based on what little I am able to gather from the confusing mess of Ukrainegate, I think he would be right to feel that way.

Posted by: John Kirsch | Nov 26 2019 19:52 utc | 1

The Democrats - at least the corrupt leadership of that party - probably coordinated this fiasco with their corporate benefactors as a way of ensuring Trump would have a second term, in much the same way John Kerry was brought in during the 2004 election to sandbag on behalf of the Democrats to make sure Bush/Cheney had another four years to continue the looting and destruction of Iraq.

American politics are largely nothing more than stage managed Kabuki theater, which is why we see such concerted efforts by both sides of the aisle to marginalize and diminish any candidates with the character and principles necessary to upset the apple cart, e.g. Tulsi Gabbard or Ron Paul back when he ran.

The ruling cabal isn't about to allow something as trivial as a popularity contest decide who runs the Empire; they've got the entire process on lock-down while keeping the little people distracted with bread and circuses.

Posted by: information_agent | Nov 26 2019 19:52 utc | 2

The Democratic Party plays an indispensable role in society's political machinery. This doesn't mean it has any power, in terms of controlling the state or setting policy. It means that without the existence of the Dem Party, the US could no longer maintain the pretense that it's a "democracy." If the Dem Party disintegrated, the US would be revealed for what it really is -- a one-party state ruled by a narrow alliance of business interests.

The party's true function is thus largely theatrical. It doesn't exist to fight for change, but only to pose as a force which one fine distant day might possibly bestir itself to fight for change. Thus the whole magic of the Dem Party -- the essential service it renders to the US power structure -- lies not in what it does, but in its mere existence: by simply existing, and doing nothing, it pretends to be something it's not; and this is enough to relieve despair & to let the system portray itself as a "democracy."

As long as the Dem Party exists, most Americans will believe we have a "democracy" and a "choice" in how we are ruled. They will not despair, and will not revolt, as long as they have this hope for "change within the system." From the system's point of view, this mechanism serves as the ultimate safety valve -- it insures against a despairing populace, thus eliminates the threat of rebellion; yet guarantees that no serious change to the system will be mounted, because the Dems weren't designed to play that role in the first place.

The Democrats are not the "lesser evil;" they are an auxiliary subdivision of the same evil. To understand the political system, one must step back and regard its operation as an integrated whole. The system can't be properly understood if one's study of it begins with an uncritical acceptance of the 2-party system, and the conventional characterizations of the two parties. (Indeed, the fact that society encourages one to view it in this latter way, is perhaps a warning that this perspective should not be trusted.)

Any given piece of reactionary legislation is invariably supported by a higher percentage of Republicans than Democrats. Does this show that the Democrats are "less evil?" If one focuses on the efforts of the few outspoken dissenters, it's easy to feel that the Democrats are somewhat less evil. But in the larger picture, Democrats invariably submit to what their bosses promulgate and the entire range of official opinion thereby shifts to the right. Thus the overall function of Democrats is not so much to fight, as to quasi-passively participate in this ever-rightward-moving process. Just as the Harlem Globetrotters need their Washington Generals to make their basketball games properly entertaining, Republicans need the Democrats for effective staging of the political show.

The Democrats are permitted to exist because their vague hint of eventual progressive change keeps large numbers of people from bolting the political system altogether. If the Democrats potentially threatened any sort of serious change, they would be banned. The fact that they are fully accepted by the corporations and political establishment tells us at once that their ultimate function must be wholly in line with the interests of those ruling groups.

For the Democratic Party to even begin to serve as a vehicle for opposing the absolute rule of capital, it would at a minimum have to be capable of acknowledging the conflict that exists between the interests of capital and the rest of the population; and of expressing a principled determination to take the side of the population in this conflict.

A party whose controlling elements are millionaires, lobbyists, fund-raisers, careerist apparatchiks, consultants, and corporate lawyers; that has stood by prostrate and helpless (when not actively collaborating) in the face of stolen elections, illegal wars, torture, CIA concentration camps, lies as state policy, and one assault on the Bill of Rights after the next, is not likely to take that position.

Posted by: Allen | Nov 26 2019 20:08 utc | 3

So-much for the Demorats being the "opposition party" to the Republicans or, most laughable, The Resistance(TM), to Donald Trump.

America's vaunted Democracy is composed of a single party--the American Empire party--which has two different factions, Democrats and Republicans.

The differences and conflicts between them are all for show.

American Democracy is political professional wrestling, Kabuki Theater, and mediocre Reality TV all rolled into.

Posted by: AK74 | Nov 26 2019 20:17 utc | 4

The first set of poll numbers on impeachment reflect that of alleged independents. It isn't comprehensive as you present it.

The second online poll is terrible "news." It actually reflects a divide between men and women of different political affiliation (not just Democratic Party Member or affiliation) and only reflects their answer to the question, "How closely are you following the news about Democrats in Congress conducting an impeachment inquiry into President Trump?" So, yes according to 1,000 people there was a 5% percent dip in interest; the previous poll 70% were interested to 30% not interested. If anything, it may reflect the short attention spans of our citizenry or just that of 50 people which could account for the 5% difference. The damn website is full of misinformation and when you start looking at the numbers you see that the Hill isn't even reporting it correctly.

Finally, another poll shows the opposite, Independent Support For Impeachment Inquiry Rises Following Public Hearings

A quick review of other polls as compiled by Real Clear Politics, reveal that support of the inquiry is also up at least according to their latest polls, please review here,
Trump Impeachment Inquiry: Support/Oppose Polls

Posted by: Kaito | Nov 26 2019 20:19 utc | 5

I've been wondering how Pelosi is going to tip-toe back away from this turd she helped lay. If they had a viable candidate, I guess censure is probably the best way to walk away from it. But they don't have a viable candidate. Did they actually imagine Biden could win? That's hard to believe.

A real-politik person might see this situation as a perfect setup for another Gladio B-type "strategy of tension" shoot-the-proles op so that HRC and MO can come out and say the white supremacists "forced" them to run but time is running out on even that pulp-fiction option.

Posted by: casey | Nov 26 2019 20:31 utc | 6

Excellent analysis. A senate impeachment trial would be a disaster for the Dems as Joe & Hunter and Adam Schiff get to testify under oath.

Posted by: ab initio | Nov 26 2019 20:40 utc | 7

This is exactly what people mean when they say that the Democrats are paid to lose, the Democrats fell all over themselves trying to protect lame horse Joe Biden from his corrupt dealings when there was no political need to throw the party over the cliff to protect Joe Biden, they could have just stood back and blamed Hunter Biden for everything. Now the Dems looks like they have thrown away the 2020 elections, perhaps the Democrats did this in the hopes they could blame the resultant clusterf**k on the "progressive" wing of the party that pushed for impeachment so the Clintons can continue their stranglehold on the party, but this entire farce has not endeared the Democrats to me at all.

Posted by: Kadath | Nov 26 2019 20:44 utc | 8

“An impeachment trial in the Senate would be a disaster for the Democrats.
I can not see why the Democrats would want to fall into such a trap. House leader Nancy Pelosi is experienced enough to not let that happen.”

The real reason in my opinion that Pelosi went along with impeachment was that she saw Bernies message getting through, and even though the DNC pushed all the conserva-dem candidates they could into the race, Bernie is still doing well and gaining. An impeachment trial would require Bernie to attend the hearings rather that campaigning. Also Wall Streets best friend Obama has just stated that Bernie is not a Democrat and that would require Obama to get on the speaking circuit to campaign against him - you know for the sake of the corporations - and those 500k speaking thank you gigs. They would rather elect Trump than Bernie - that is why I think Pelosi would go along with an impeachment trial in the Senate - Bernie is the greater threat.

Posted by: Stever | Nov 26 2019 21:01 utc | 9

The idea to censure Trump and move on has been aired since mid 2017. The latest was Forbes.com billwhalen 26 September 2019 Link

I ordered a truckload of pop corn to snack on during the trial in the Senate. Just imagine Joe Biden under cross examination as he flips 'n flops! "Was that me in the Video, I can't recall."

Guess I will have to unpack some popcorn. At this phase in the process an impeachable offence remains undefined!??
House Judiciary Committee Sets Date For Impeachment Hearing, Invites Trump To Testify

With interest (even among Democrats) in the impeachment process sliding, the House Judiciary Committee is set to take over the impeachment probe of President Trump next week, scheduling a Dec. 4 hearing.

As The Hill reports, behind Judiciary Chairman Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.), the committee will hear from legal scholars as Democrats weigh whether the evidence turned up in their weeks-long impeachment inquiry warrants the drafting of articles aimed at removing the president from office.

The hearing, scheduled for next Wednesday, will focus on the definition of an impeachable offense and the formal application of the impeachment process. The panel will invite White House lawyers to attend and participate.

Ahead of the hearing, Nadler wrote to Trump requesting his participation - or that of White House counsel - as part of ensuring "a fair and informative process."[.]

Trump will take a page from the other president who campaigned on the "do nothing congress"

Posted by: Likklemore | Nov 26 2019 21:01 utc | 10

and now obama weighs in to warn against the real danger to the democrats, bernie sanders. that's who they have to beat, and gabbard. they don't give much of a damn about beating trump.

Posted by: pretzelattack | Nov 26 2019 21:16 utc | 11

b, there seems to be a critical flaw in your analysis--you seem to base it on a premise that the goal of the Democratic establishment is to win elections/gain power/govern. It's not, it's to ensure the continuing enrichment of themselves and their oligarch peers, financial industry, military, pharma, etc.

The question people like Pelosi (worth $100 million or so btw along with her husband whose business she enriches via her position) are pondering isn't "Will doing x, y, z help Trump win?" It's "Will doing x, y, z ensure Bernie Sanders doesn't win?"

Posted by: Wind Hippo | Nov 26 2019 21:21 utc | 12

No group of adults is that stupid.
They are doing and will do as they are required to do by their owners.

Posted by: jared | Nov 26 2019 21:25 utc | 14

Of all the things that the Democrats could impeach President Trump over, the one thing they seized upon was the issue that had the most potential to blow back on them and destroy Joe Biden's chances of reaching the White House. Whoever had that brilliant idea and put it as the long straw in a cylindrical prawn-chip can along with all the other straws for pulling out, sure didn't think of all the consequences that could have arisen. That speaks for the depth (or lack thereof) of the thinking among senior Democrats and their worker bee analysts, along with a narrow-minded outlook, sheer hatred of a political outsider and a fanatical zeal to match that hatred and outlook.

The folks who hatched that particular impeachment plan and pitched it to Nancy Pelosi must have been the same idiots in the DNC who dreamt up the Russiagate scandal and also pursued Paul Manafort to get him off DJT's election campaign team. Dmitri Alperovich / Crowdstrike, Alexandra Chalupa: we're looking at you.

Posted by: Jen | Nov 26 2019 21:31 utc | 15

Impeachment takes Sanders out of the campaign and that opens things up for the CIA/establishment's "Identity Politics Candidate #3", Mayor Butt-gig.

That said, since "Everyone who doesn't vote for our candidate is a deplorable misogynist!" didn't work as expected, I wonder what makes them think "Everyone who doesn't vote for our candidate is a deplorable homophobe!" will work any better?

Posted by: William Gruff | Nov 26 2019 21:37 utc | 16

Lots of agreement here with the overall situation becoming clearer with Bloomberg's entrance and the outing of Obama's plans. I just finished writing my response to Putin's speech before the annual United Russia Party Congress on the Open Thread and suggest barflies take 10 minutes to read it and compare what he espouses a political party's deeds & goals ought to be versus those of the West and its vassals.

Clearly, the goal is to prevent the US Polity from clawing back power from the 10% and enacting policies to their benefit. Meanwhile, a new form of Transnational Nationalism continues to take shape that will soon present a serious threat to the Financialized Globalizers and their Cult of Debt. Too many seem to laugh off the entire situation by dismissing it as Kabuki Theatre, which I see as self-serving and shortsighted since there're several very real crises we're in up to our collective armpits.

Posted by: karlof1 | Nov 26 2019 21:52 utc | 17

I can see a Trump marketing consultant designing a campaign centered on the impeachment hearings called "The Swamp Strikes Back". It might be most effective as a comic strip.

Posted by: Maracatu | Nov 26 2019 21:56 utc | 18

'Managed democracy'...

... as entertainment.

Enjoy the kayfabe...

... as they pick your pockets.

Big Brother loves you...

... so the Kool-Aid is free.

!!

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Nov 26 2019 22:03 utc | 19

thanks b.. looking at the theatre, it seems dems have backed themselves into a corner... meanwhile obama wants to ca-bosh sanders... you know if sanders had some character he would run as an independent with tulsi.. but you all know that stands a snowball chance in hell.. the problem with conformists, is they spend too much time conforming and that doesn't end up serving anyone.. and it is the reason trump got elected - he is not a conformist.. self centered narcissist, yes, but conformist - no.. too bad about american leadership being persona non grata...

what i don't understand is why bernie doesn't run as an independent? if he is so great and would be great for the usa, why can't he figure this basic picture out? this is why i give merit to jackrabbit sometimes - it is all political theatre and they are all in it together raping the common people..

Posted by: james | Nov 26 2019 22:58 utc | 20

A full blown impeachment trial that exposes the entire Russia-gate/Ukraine-gate/Whatever-gate sham is what this country needs.

Obviously, a sufficient number of secure Republican representatives are needed to vote in favor of impeachment to allow this circus to continue to its bizarrely entertaining, Democratic Party destroying end.

Posted by: James Speaks | Nov 26 2019 22:58 utc | 21

The MSM will declare Trump guilty - that is, he has earned impeachment for Ukrainegate.

There are Democrats still under the illusion that Trump colluded with Russia to steal the election. Dems tell us that Trump *obstructed* the Mueller investigation thus Trump could not be nailed, nonetheless Trump is guilty of collusion until proven innocent.

Back to Ukrainegate.

Bet the MSM sells Ukrainegate this way:

Trump is guilty in Ukrainegate and should be impeached, but Democrats are moving on to focus on the election. And besides, Dems will tell us, the dastardly Republicans in the Senate will corruptly block Trump's impeachment.

Posted by: librul | Nov 26 2019 22:59 utc | 22

@Posted by: karlof1 | Nov 26 2019 21:52 utc | 17

All those promising prospects you envision in Putin and his party, get easily debunked by their continuous position on the Bolivian issue...and others...

Just at Vesti News ( official channel Rossiya 1 ) they are tlaking about the peaceful demostrations of the indigenous majority pro-Morales in Bolivia as "offensive", whitewashing the police fascist forces who have just assasinated 32 people to date, making them victims, and in any case equating all the brutal force of a state from military, police, death squads with the masses of unarmed peasants...

In the video appear Añez as "Lady Bolivia" peacefully and delicately passing with her presidential strip ( as if she was not the racist fascist witch she really is..)while the indigenous people are painted as violent ( because they hanged a mummy representing Añez...) and rebellious, as if would had been them who have provokated all this. There appear a scene where the masses of peasants have surrounded a solitary police, out of duty, who is pushed and harassed a bit, and given two blows, which is described by the reporter as an intend of lynching by the masses, as if everybody was the same there...when so far there have not been any dead neither amongst the police, military or death squads ( if not because the peasants have no with what to defend themselves....and anhyway i doubt they would do it...)

Last, but not least, they whitewash the fascists as "liberals", and going beyond shame the "reporter" reproaches that there is no leadership amongst the peasants to address it so as to calm things down...As if all their leadership would had not been ousted from the country, or beated, detained or scared to death...One would send this guy back in time to Stalingrad siege, or carnage in Belarus villages so so t ask the people there to clam and ask for a leader to calm them from harming the nazis back so as to remain alive...But,well, the thing is, and this is crystla clear, that this people, this reporter, his bosses at this channel and those in the government who fund this channel, had no relatives in Stalingrad, but surely in the opposite trench, and in case they had, they just have decided to change sides because of love for privileges...

This is a shame, as if it was not enough that the Russian officials would had recognized this fascist government came out of a violent coup d´etat. And this is disinformation and just the same shameful position taken by the MSM,the US and the EU....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O0PGKUnW-8k

Thus, please, at least do not follow selling us that bridge here...

The thing is that to Putin and his minions, the peasants, from wherever, should remain always peasants, out of power and shut up, as it was during Tsarist times...I always got that feeling, especially with Putin´s deference to Western agent Solzhenytsin and thieving Romanovs, the thieving Yeltsins, the remaining thieving oligarchs and the new ones, and all that tale of these people all day in the church...but I decided to ignore it.. as long as I believed they were antifascists, a fake I swallowed during the Ukrianian crisis ...but the veil has definitely fallen...In fact I had already my serious doubts when the Donbass commanders were falling, one after another, especially Mozgovoi...

One should always attend its instinct when it talks...

If it were not enough, I am finding extremely suspicious the current praising Putin and the Russian are having in all the US military blogs or where US military people use to frequent...

Nauseating!

Posted by: Sasha | Nov 26 2019 23:15 utc | 23

Btw, as a sign to show that what the Russian media are reporting is what beneffits the fascist government of Añez, the fact that almost all independent or alternative media have been already beated and ousted from the country or shut up off line, as has happened with TeleSur and some others...

Ask yourself why...

Posted by: Sasha | Nov 26 2019 23:28 utc | 24

Tulsi Gabbard Tweet not specifically about impeachment but begs numerous questions:

"My personal commitment is to always treat you and all Americans with respect. Working side-by-side, we can defeat the divisiveness of Donald Trump, and usher in a 21st century of peace, human dignity, & true equality. Working side by side, we can make Dr. King’s dream our reality." [My Emphasis]

Questions: Is Trump divisive, or is it the D-Party and Current Oligarchy that make him so; and which is more important to defeat? Which party "usher[ed] in the 21st century" with several wars and abetted the next two? How did Obama, Slick Willie or his wife advance "human dignity & true equality"? How does her last sentence differ from "Hope you can believe in"? Hasn't her D-Party worked tirelessly for decades to circumvent the goals she espouses? Wouldn't Gabbard have a better chance running as an Enlightened Republican than as a Renegade Democrat if her goal's to defeat Trump?

Posted by: karlof1 | Nov 26 2019 23:28 utc | 25

American Democracy is political professional wrestling, Kabuki Theater, and mediocre Reality TV all rolled into. by: AK74 @ 4 <= binary divide <=conducted by the USA, is not about America, Americans or making America great again, its about the welfare of [the few<= which most Americans would not call fellow Americans].

Sasha.@ 23 I don't understand where you are coming from.. thank Korlof1 @18 for posting that Putin talk alert. excerpts from the talk.. => The priority [of United Russia has been] the protection of the people’s interests, the interests of [the] Motherland, and ..responsible [approach] to ..country, its security, stability and people’s lives in the long-term perspective.

The party.. offered a unifying agenda based on freedom and well being, patriotism, ..traditional values, a strong civil society and a strong state. The key issue in the party’s work .being together with the people, Karlof1@18 <=this talk suggest change in Russian leadership that are not congruent with your [Sasha] comment @23. I hope you will make more clear what you spent sometime writing ( and for that effort I thank you) but it is not yet clear what you mean.. .

Posted by: snake | Nov 26 2019 23:30 utc | 26

Re: Brenda Lawrence talking about censure rather than impeachment:

That is what they call a "trial balloon"

If there isn't too much of a freakout among the true-believer base, and I don't think there is, it'll be an option they will at least take seriously. Not that I'm encouraging anyone to bet on rational thinking at this point. Anyway I agree it's the best move for congressional Democrats.

Yet another other option is to continue the investigation indefinitely. I'm going to say it is their default move actually. In that case, the House Judiciary Committee would spend a few weeks putting on their own show, then say they would like more evidence to be really sure, returning matters to the House Intelligence Committee, and we repeat the cycle.

Posted by: ptb | Nov 26 2019 23:42 utc | 27

@Posted by: snake | Nov 26 2019 23:30 utc | 26

I have not the time to explain myself better now, if you have been following the information I have kept posting here from activists, and that which "b" as well has posted, I think that you will make yourself aware of my points by viewing the video I have linked above.

For what me is respected, Putin can just tell the Mountain Sermon, and promise paradise on Earth, that as long as his acts contradict all that, i will reamin fixed in his actions than in his speeches, be them "I am gonna scaring the hell out of the world", or the "I am the savior" ones...

He simply is handing out some scrumbles to the peasants, and especially big ones to the police and armed forces so that they do not revolt....I am seeing it increasingly crystaline...

Posted by: Sasha | Nov 26 2019 23:50 utc | 28

These guys are nuts. All they are doing is trying to buy as much time as they can to try to find a way to stay in power (both sides). If it were not so, then they would have already disregarded all gag orders and all non-disclosure orders against whichever targets they were actually after and used all documentation that they already friggin' have. The entire show is nonsense.

Posted by: Josh | Nov 27 2019 0:03 utc | 29

"Men oppose impeachment 40-53 while women favor it 61-34.
That's a pretty stunning contrast."

well, if this "clever wordsmith" had said it normally as "men oppose/women oppose" then it would be men 40-53 and women 39-66. hardly "stunning" other than the surprising amount of support from women for a guy who is the present "gender hitler". but then he got a lot of conservative female votes in 2016. both bushes got muslim votes. voters do weird shit.

as for the actual impeachment mess, i knew it would go nowhere and had zero interest in hearing any side of it. it was about keeping trump from running against whatever middle manager the dems shove down voters' throats as "the only alternative". also setting a new high bar for moronic virtue signalling and russia bashing.

Posted by: the_pair | Nov 27 2019 0:09 utc | 30

I am liking all the commenters here that understand that there is only one empire party with two mythical faces.

I think this kabuki is necessary if you don't have a major WAR to keep the masses focused on or otherwise distracted from the underlying R2P which I translate to Rape2Protect.

It is sad to see us all talking about which of the lesser of horrible evils will continue the leadership of American faced empire.....I hope it crashes soon and takes the global elite down with it.....how many barflies are ready to stand up and say NO to the owners of the Super-Priority derivatives that will say they own the world because of their casino (no skin in the game) bets that are currently "legal" in America when the crash comes?

Posted by: psychohistorian | Nov 27 2019 0:14 utc | 31

A search of the Russian Foreign Ministry's website regarding Bolivia provided many returns of which the following was Russia's stated position as of 11 November:

"Sergey Ryabkov: We have taken note of the report that the Senate’s second vice-president assumed the post of Bolivia’s interim president. We presume that the appointment, and the main thing – the legitimacy of the head of state must clearly correspond to the legislative norms of the country’s Constitution, to serve to unite rather than divide the nation.

"The issue of electing leaders is the internal and sovereign matter of the country and its people. We are concerned that recent developments were reminiscent of a coup. The Senate could not gather a quorum to elect Ms Anez president. Correspondingly, her decision to lead the country is based on an interpretation of the provisions of the Constitution.

"Meanwhile, if we proceed from the current situation in Bolivia, it is clear that Ms Anez will be accepted as Bolivia’s leader until the issue of a new president is resolved through an election. Our recognition or non-recognition of her in this position is not an issue."

Russia's position is consistent with those of the recent past and international law. Sasha doesn't like that; nor does it care for me. Here's a link to a more recent report:

"Russia’s position on the recent events in Bolivia was clearly stated by President Vladimir Putin at a news conference in Brasilia on November 14, 2019. Its legal aspects were highlighted by the heads of the Foreign Ministry: Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov. In particular, Mr Ryabkov’s answer to the question by the Prensa Latina news agency, which is published on the Foreign Ministry website, is still relevant. We have repeatedly confirmed it, and I am doing this again now.

"Unfortunately, the social and political environment in the country remains tense. The new government, which came to power through actions involving elements of a state coup, faces the issue of legitimacy, and this continues to have destabilising potential. I am not only talking about clashes between Evo Morales’s supporters and opponents, but also about the possibility of a confrontation on ethnic and social grounds.

"We must not disregard a very important fact: Bolivia’s official name is the Plurinational State. We understand very well what consequences a conflict on ethnic grounds can have, especially if it is deliberately heated and encouraged from outside. This is a very sensitive and complex issue. It is very easy to do damage and very hard to repair. Bolivia is a multiethnic state dominated by the indigenous Indian people. There are 37 official languages with a population of 10.5 million people."

There's more, but you get the fact that Russia is deeply concerned and is not in anyway pleased with events there, regardless how Russian Media spin what's happening.

Posted by: karlof1 | Nov 27 2019 0:25 utc | 32

At least this mess made it patently clear the Dem obsession with Russia has been all about preserving their Ukraine pickpocketing operation.

Posted by: Fly | Nov 27 2019 0:30 utc | 33

@ snake

American "Democracy" is a mask for the American Empire and its capitalist system--including especially the American Military and its Intelligence apparatus (aka The Deep State).

If the American people don't identify with these institutions, you would see much greater hostility to--if not outright rebellion against--the American military and spooks.

Instead, you see the very opposite: the American people saluting, glorifying, "thanking for their service," and politically fellating the US military and spy agencies every chance they get.

That should tell you all you need to know about Americans.

Posted by: AK74 | Nov 27 2019 0:51 utc | 34

It is Russia's stated policy (like China) to not interfere in other countries' internal politics, America's weird delusions to the contrary notwithstanding. Despite the fact that the US is backing the fascists in Bolivia, the coup and resulting power struggle is still an internal matter for the Bolivian people to resolve. Beyond opposing America's involvement in the crisis in Bolivia, the proper response of nation states to this sort of crisis is still to insist upon adherence to international law. That is what Russia is doing.

Now, if individuals are interested in getting involved there is always the option of forming International Brigades to go and help. Alternatively, individuals can organize themselves at their workplaces and then strike in solidarity with the working people of Bolivia (actually far more effective than even forming International Brigades). Criticizing the Russians for not responding to America's entirely predictable "regime change" operation with "Shock and Awe", on the other hand, is not very constructive.

Posted by: William Gruff | Nov 27 2019 0:58 utc | 35

If this show should teach people in the US anything (again), it is how both US parties descend like vultures onto countries where they manage to take over the government.

Five billion poured into Ukraine with the requisite murder and mayhem, and who knows how many billions come pouring back out. It's a real jackpot for those in the right positions to scoop it into their pockets.

The average people in the US don't even have a genuine safety net. Important for all those productive resources to go to pedophile islands and sinecures for coke head sons of politicians, obviously.

Posted by: Guest | Nov 27 2019 1:27 utc | 36

Re: #3 Allen – well said. The GOP is the party of the rich. The Democrats are the party the rich pay to keep the left at bay when the Republicans lose.

Posted by: Dave | Nov 27 2019 1:38 utc | 37

The problem with this prediction is that the MSM has been breathlessly pronouncing that THIS IS EXPLOSIVE EVIDENCE!!!! pretty much every day and after every witness testimony.

So if you are a member of the public who gets their "information" from the MSM (and, be honest, that is most of the people in the USA) then you have been force-fed is that Trumps defense against these allegations has already been shredded, and that his guilt has already been established beyond any reasonable doubt.

How can those opinion-makers then turn around and say "Nah, it'll be fine" and settle for a mere censure?

Wouldn't the Sheeple respond with a fully-justified "Hey, hang on! What gives?"

The Democrats has leapt on a Tiger. Nobody made them do it, but now they are there I don't think they are going to be able to leap off.

Some of the first-term nobodies, maybe, but not the Schiffs and the Pelopis and the Nadlers.

Hang on for dear life and hope for a miracle is probably their only option now.

And, who knows, that trio may be so incompetent that they actually think they are going to win.

Posted by: Yeah, Right | Nov 27 2019 1:38 utc | 38

Via, perhaps, One who has established Truth, Standing, and Right, Declaring so.... Lawfully.

Posted by: Josh | Nov 27 2019 1:49 utc | 39

james, the deck is stacked even more against independents than it is against actual mildly leftist candidates who run as democrats. there are a substantial number of people who think the only way to change the country is to take over the democratic party. frankly, that isn't going to happen, and nobody is going to win as an independent candidate with all the procedural rules making it so hard to even get on the ballot, while the state government, which is invariably controlled by one of the two parties, throws every roadblock, legal and illegal, in the way. my gut feeling is things are going to have to get quite a bit worse before the citizenry starts to explode, and there's no telling how that process will work out, and no way to control it once it reaches critical mass.

Posted by: pretzelattack | Nov 27 2019 1:56 utc | 40

"Whoever it was the Democrats