What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

We're in a permanent coup (2 Viewers)

Max Power

Footballguy
Americans might soon wish they just waited to vote their way out of the Trump era

- By Matt Taibbi

https://taibbi.substack.com/p/were-in-a-permanent-coup

My discomfort in the last few years, first with Russiagate and now with Ukrainegate and impeachment, stems from the belief that the people pushing hardest for Trump’s early removal are more dangerous than Trump.
It's an interesting read and comes from a place of concern by a journalist who dislikes Trump. I think the author does a good job highlighting some aspects of the last 3 years that should frighten all Americans.  The comment section is worth a read as well as many of your "What about...." questions may be addressed. 

 
Americans might soon wish they just waited to vote their way out of the Trump era

- By Matt Taibbi

https://taibbi.substack.com/p/were-in-a-permanent-coup

It's an interesting read and comes from a place of concern by a journalist who dislikes Trump. I think the author does a good job highlighting some aspects of the last 3 years that should frighten all Americans.  The comment section is worth a read as well as many of your "What about...." questions may be addressed. 
:goodposting:

 
Why bother with Taibbi? Why not just quote @ren hoek directly? 
The article makes some compelling points that will be uncomfortable for many people in this forum to confront.  Why distract from that by making some irrelevant point about an individual poster?  Oh yeah, that is the forum's SOP.  Nevermind. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ren made a similar arguement in the whistle blower thread accusing the intelligence community of making a coup on the executive branch.    
Ren likely got it from Taibbi. I got a Taibbi freebie in my inbox from Ren. I'm interested in this article. Taibbi's no right-populist apologist.

 
If you think this was all just a big frame job, you accept an awful lot of coincidence in how it has all happened, especially to just dismiss it entirely. 
 I suppose I’m someone who has viewed trump as a buffoon that comes from money and declares bankruptcy or simply doesn’t pay contractors, pushes conspiricy theories, and has a questionable reputation with women, so it isn’t a stretch for me to think he’s shady. Then you look at the fact that Jr has claimed “we have Russian money all over Link,” the president claims to not have any property in Russia (but fails to adress how much Russian money has flowed to him) Link while trying to hide his tax returns. Several administration officials have ties to questionable Russians, Russia helped him win and admitted it. They met with a Russian lawyer who said they had dirt on Clinton, then said she wanted to talk about adoptions (magnistky act ties Russian adoptions to illegal money investment), and that’s it; later said information is released through another party with communication to/from Trump. I’ll point  out the fact that she was indicted for obstruction in another case involving Prevezon, who had a $250million lawsuit against them for using stolen money settled ($6 million) shortly after Trump took office (and fired preet barhara and replaced him.) This all ties in to the magnisky act, which I will point to again as being the end all barometer of being Putin’s puppet- if the administration tries to dismantle it there will be no doubt in my mind. This is all corroborated by statements from Trump/jr/etc, except for the Wikileaks communications with stone and from stone to trump admin (the third party I referenced) Maybe I’m just too simple to understand international politics, but ignoring what anyone else might try to tell me and looking at what’s gone on, this all looks pretty damning, and that doesn’t even start to scratch the surface of the current scandal. 
Maybe, and I know I’m going out on a limb here, but maybe they’re all just a bunch of crooks. 
 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
If you think this was all just a big frame job, you accept an awful lot of coincidence in how it has all happened, especially to just dismiss it entirely. 
 I suppose I’m someone who has viewed trump as a buffoon that comes from money and declares bankruptcy or simply doesn’t pay contractors, pushes conspiricy theories, and has a questionable reputation with women, so it isn’t a stretch for me to think he’s shady. Then you look at the fact that Jr has claimed “we have Russian money all over Link,” the president claims to not have any property in Russia (but fails to adress how much Russian money has flowed to him) Link while trying to hide his tax returns. Several administration officials have ties to questionable Russians, Russia helped him win and admitted it. They met with a Russian lawyer who said they had dirt on Clinton, then said she wanted to talk about adoptions (magnistky act ties Russian adoptions to illegal money investment), and that’s it; later said information is released through another party with communication to/from Trump. I’ll point  out the fact that she was indicted for obstruction in another case involving Prevezon, who had a $250million lawsuit against them for using stolen money settled ($6 million) shortly after Trump took office (and fired preet barhara and replaced him.) This all ties in to the magnisky act, which I will point to again as being the end all barometer of being Putin’s puppet- if the administration tries to dismantle it there will be no doubt in my mind. This is all corroborated by statements from Trump/jr/etc, except for the Wikileaks communications with stone and from stone to trump admin (the third party I referenced) Maybe I’m just too simple to understand international politics, but ignoring what anyone else might try to tell me and looking at what’s gone on, this all looks pretty damning, and that doesn’t even start to scratch the surface of the current scandal. 
Maybe, and I know I’m going out on a limb here, but maybe they’re all just a bunch of crooks. 
 
Most of what you said is not being disputed in the article.

I'm in the camp that thinks most Presidents have done shady #### while in office, even similar to what Trump did in the phone call. The difference is that Trump got caught and exposed and should face whatever punishment is coming his way. But the reason he got caught is because of leaks and whistleblowers who, miraculously, didn't seem to appear as often under previous administrations. No doubt Trump has brought a lot of this on himself but it's been obvious that there are certain people who have had it out for him from Day 1. Those same people probably let a lot slide in years past.

 
Most of what you said is not being disputed in the article.

I'm in the camp that thinks most Presidents have done shady #### while in office, even similar to what Trump did in the phone call. The difference is that Trump got caught and exposed and should face whatever punishment is coming his way. But the reason he got caught is because of leaks and whistleblowers who, miraculously, didn't seem to appear as often under previous administrations. No doubt Trump has brought a lot of this on himself but it's been obvious that there are certain people who have had it out for him from Day 1. Those same people probably let a lot slide in years past.
This article describes me, as someone who thought he should be out day one. 

Yes, but if he were compromised from day 1, they should have been. If he’s told “Russia may reach out to you” and then they do and you gladly meet with them, they recommend against hiring Michael Flynn because of his past but you do anyway.

Past presidents have used money and weapons and aid to coerce foreign entities, but not to investigate their political opponent. There isn’t anyone else Trump wanted investigated, let’s be honest here. A visit to the White House and then needed military aid were held over zelensky’s head in exchange for a public statement that they were looking into Burisma and the 2016 election interference. Someone spoke up, because that is alarming. It lends credit to the idea that Russia wasn’t behind the attacks. Meanwhile Russia has created a large scale cyber warfare unit and is ready to do whatever it is they have planned while we sit on our hands. While McConnell has millions invested in his district by Russians. 
I’ll be interested to see what Trumps hand picked team finds with regards to the beginning of the mueller investigation. Hopefully we get a full report and not just a summary by ag Barr. 

 
I think the author does a good job highlighting some aspects of the last 3 years that should frighten all Americans.
The frightening thing is Trump being President - I have no issue with any way they get him out.  And it will just be via the election anyway - nobody believes the Senate votes him out.

 
Must be a whole backstory I'm missing. 

No take on the article?
Not really. It’s the usual far left “America is evil so it’s hypocritical to point at any one President like Trump because they all suck, and the worst are the Democratic establishment because they reject radical leftists like me.” It’s a bit boring at this point. 

What’s more interesting to me is that you and other conservatives would glom onto crap that you would normally reject, mainly because it’s a sort of defense for Trump. 

 
Not really. It’s the usual far left “America is evil so it’s hypocritical to point at any one President like Trump because they all suck, and the worst are the Democratic establishment because they reject radical leftists like me.” It’s a bit boring at this point. 

What’s more interesting to me is that you and other conservatives would glom onto crap that you would normally reject, mainly because it’s a sort of defense for Trump. 
There is no reason to reject it.  This is similar to J Edgar Hoover type stuff, so really just history repeating and not all that crazy.  

 
Americans might soon wish they just waited to vote their way out of the Trump era

- By Matt Taibbi

https://taibbi.substack.com/p/were-in-a-permanent-coup

It's an interesting read and comes from a place of concern by a journalist who dislikes Trump. I think the author does a good job highlighting some aspects of the last 3 years that should frighten all Americans.  The comment section is worth a read as well as many of your "What about...." questions may be addressed. 
Its false from the start using the word coup.

And dangerous when Trump throws this around and gets support for that lunacy.

 
If administration officials keep turning on Donald, it's mostly because he does crappy illegal things all the time and incurs little loyalty because of his many character deficiencies. Nobody wants to stand up for him and be tarred in turn by his awfulness.

Some of you have made a huge mistake in judgment backing this broken horse.

 
Americans might soon wish they just waited to vote their way out of the Trump era

- By Matt Taibbi

https://taibbi.substack.com/p/were-in-a-permanent-coup

It's an interesting read and comes from a place of concern by a journalist who dislikes Trump. I think the author does a good job highlighting some aspects of the last 3 years that should frighten all Americans.  The comment section is worth a read as well as many of your "What about...." questions may be addressed. 
Thanks, I will read it when I get a chance. What I don’t want is Trump removed when half the country is against it. If 2/3 or more of the country wants him removed, then I think impeachment and removal is good. I wish we could vote on whether we want it to move forward- kind of like a vote of no confidence or a recall. My concern isn’t as much as that Trump is in office as it is that almost half the voting population wants him there. 

 
Thanks, I will read it when I get a chance. What I don’t want is Trump removed when half the country is against it. If 2/3 or more of the country wants him removed, then I think impeachment and removal is good. I wish we could vote on whether we want it to move forward- kind of like a vote of no confidence or a recall. My concern isn’t as much as that Trump is in office as it is that almost half the voting population wants him there. 
I dont care how many of the country are against it.  If the facts support an impeachable offense he should be gone.  Its not a popularity contest especially hen we have seen some will support him no matter what.  Its a legal issue, not one to be polled.

 
I dont care how many of the country are against it.  If the facts support an impeachable offense he should be gone.  Its not a popularity contest especially hen we have seen some will support him no matter what.  Its a legal issue, not one to be polled.
It is a popularity contest. That’s all democracy has ever been. 

 
This is why I have said we already lost. We lost when Trump won the GOP nomination and then won the election. Both alternatives are bad. Only the people again can rightfully remove the President either through an election or overwhelmingly strong support of a legal case against him. The whole system comes apart if half the country still wants him to be President and he is removed.

 
Here is the problem, if the House does not go forward with the impeachment inquiry, then Congress is basically giving up its seat at the table.  You cannot have a President or administration of either party, refusing to work with the other equal branches.  

As an American do I want the President Impeached? No, but I also want a President that will listen and work with Congress even if its an investigation into things he does not like.    

Be honest, if the Dems do not walk through the steps they are doing, guess what happens when a Dem is President and GOP controls the house.. it will be the reverse. 

So you may not like it, but the House is doing its job and it has to do this if Congress wants to keep being a equal part of the government.

 
One of the most offensive elements of modern day ideologues, both from the right and the left (but more from the right) is how they misapply history  to justify their thinking. So we’re told that Democrats were racist without explaining that southern Democrats were conservative; or that “McCarthyism” means any persecution of a public figure that we don’t like without explaining what the Red Scare was all about. 

Now we’re told that the civil servants who have exposed Trump’s corruption, at great personal risk are no different from the corrupt J Edgar Hoover who fabricated information on his political opponents and consistently violated civil rights in this country. Up is down, Black is white. 

 
But that is kind of the point, it is not at all far-fetched when far worse abuses of the intelligence agencies have occurred.
I asked my question because if you had read about Hoover you would know why what’s happening now is not only vastly different but pretty much the exact opposite, and why what Hoover did makes this sort of silly theory far less likely, not more. 

 
It is a popularity contest. That’s all democracy has ever been. 
Not really...and in this case...removal is a legal process.  I don't give a rat's ### if Joe Schmo Trump guy won't ever admit its bad...if the law supports removal, he should be removed.

 
I think this is untrue.  I don't think there is anyone more dangerous in the US than an un-checked president who believes he has unfettered powers.
And people who, no matter what, support him and believe what he says and won't waiver even when things get to the point of possible removal for legal reasons.

If it got to the point where the Senate was moving to remove...and people still didn't believe...I mean evidence convincing enough of the GOP to remove...the danger isn't removal.  The danger is how are so many people duped by Trump to not support it when the evidence would be that clear?

 
You've becoming like the blowhard uncle at Thanksgiving, an expert on everything and anything
I’m no expert at all. I read the books that are available to everyone. I watch the History Channel from time to time. 

But in order to learn about this stuff accurately, you have to step outside of your ideological bubble. 

 
Not really...and in this case...removal is a legal process.  I don't give a rat's ### if Joe Schmo Trump guy won't ever admit its bad...if the law supports removal, he should be removed.
Sure but if we are talking impeachment and removal, it’s done by an elected group of partisans. We all know damn well that more than just the law will factor into their decision.

 
Sure but if we are talking impeachment and removal, it’s done by an elected group of partisans. We all know damn well that more than just the law will factor into their decision.
But for removal...the partisan side is gone, no?  that would mean his own people that have been with him...his own party agrees the stuff is that bad and they turned on him.  To get this group of GOP senators to turn...that would be pretty big.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
So that opinion piece is compelling...but the whistleblower complaint is “partisan innuendo and heresy”?
It's very interesting the use of the word "heresy" in this case, since that implies worship of Trump, and if "Christians" start throwing that term around, who are they truly worshiping?

 
But for removal...the partisan side is gone, no?  that would mean his own people that have been with him...his own party agrees the stuff is that bad and they turned on him.
Yeah that’s fair. That gets into some interesting dilemmas for the GOP members of Congress. Should they vote how “the party”  wants them to vote, should they vote based on personal beliefs or should they see themselves as representatives of their district and vote how their district wants them to vote? It could be very messy and even more deeply erode faith in our system if GOP members who represent districts that strongly want Trump to stay end up voting to remove. It’s a lose-lose.

 
So lets wait and compete in an election that the President and the Republican party have repeadetly and grossly demonstrated they have no intention of running elections fairly. 

Lots of "lets imagine" and "what ifs". 

Also it trys to propel the notion that there was no "there" there in Russia gate. There was repeated and corrupt collusion if not provable conspiracy, and that's only perhaps of complete and sytematic obstruction of justice that is clearly criminal behavior. They are commuicating on encypted electronic devices and personal email RIGHT NOW. The executive has repeadetly denied the legislative its legitimate constitutional rights to oversight. It has skipped the approval process for cabinet level appointments. 

In other words PFFFFFT. Please. 

 
Ren made a similar arguement in the whistle blower thread accusing the intelligence community of making a coup on the executive branch.    
Ren's point was a twitter post from a fellow writer/editor of Taibbi who was talking about this exact article that he retweeted. 

One major problem with it is that Ren & Levine - like you have previously - expressed what a low, corrupt SOB Trump is. Which really supports the claims of the WBer.

It's really ridiculous. It starts out with the premise that Trump is a lying, corrupt loathsome person and then it criticizes people who are saying Trump is exactly the sort of person to do the sort of thing he's accused of. This is who Trump is by your own admission.

I guess the other aspect of this whole Taibbi-horseshoe issue is that it intersects ultimately with Bannon. Widbill's not here anymore but this is exactly the point he always happily and freely made, that the point is to destroy the system. So the fact that the WB has used an institutional method to avoid politicization is exactly the problem. These people do not want institutions solving anything. And they get supposed conservatives like you to reject your own principles and buy in.

And I think - without even getting into the article - which even Max and you aren't touching - is that Trump wants total political control of the IC & DOJ. That is is his purpose and philosophy here, and he has already accomplished this with Barr in the DOJ. Do you really want that?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Taibbi has long been a vocal critic of US Intelligence services. Nothing new there but this is a pretty disingenuous piece in that it completely ignores the SDNY charges that the two guys weren't arrested for peddling Biden info, but for acting as a pass-through for illegal foreign campaign contributions to the GOP. THAT'S the story here.

 
Most of what you said is not being disputed in the article.

I'm in the camp that thinks most Presidents have done shady #### while in office, even similar to what Trump did in the phone call. The difference is that Trump got caught and exposed and should face whatever punishment is coming his way. But the reason he got caught is because of leaks and whistleblowers who, miraculously, didn't seem to appear as often under previous administrations. No doubt Trump has brought a lot of this on himself but it's been obvious that there are certain people who have had it out for him from Day 1. Those same people probably let a lot slide in years past.
What evidence do you have that these whistleblowers are politically motivated and/or there is any difference in their quantity than in the past?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I’m no expert at all. I read the books that are available to everyone. I watch the History Channel from time to time. 

But in order to learn about this stuff accurately, you have to step outside of your ideological bubble. 
:lmao:  HTP with the "you guys think you're so smart" schtick.

Trump guys, your defenses and arguments are weak sauce. I hope saying that doesn't violate our "be excellent" guidelines these days. I consider it just a little chest-thumping.

 
I think the author does a good job highlighting some aspects of the last 3 years that should frighten all Americans.
Taibbi has some serious things wrong in this article:

Trump, at least insofar as we know, has not used section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act to monitor political rivals. 
Section 702 was never used against Trump. A lot has come out of the investigation but what is known is that 702 was never used. Title I was used, which involves going to the court to get a warrant

I will also add that suggesting Trump is anti Deep State is a false premise. Above I noted what Trump is attempting to do with the DOJ with Barr which is put it under his personal direct control for his personal benefit.

And Trump has used DHS, ICE & CPB as a Deep State arm - internment camps, political arrests based on race, and abuse of human rights in the course of those. He also used a trumped up national emergency for further get around the Constitution.

Trump has advocated using the deep state of foreign adversaries, stolen / hacked PRIVATE data from Americans, and he has personally instructed the heads of FBI, DNI, white house counsel, and DHS to take actions favorable towards him.

Trump has used foreign informants against his political opponents via his personal attorney and the AG, while using a USA Attorney who is not appointed following any law anywhere. There are two ways to initiate a criminal investigation - by DOJ criminal division or the special counsel statute - and Durham does not follow either of those.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Users who are viewing this thread

Top