@sheethaduskrunner.bsky.social
psychologist, lover of books and crafts, boomer
You still did not bring a single argument for attempting measures that you must expect to fail.
You deny the negative impact that would have without giving a counter-argument.
Shotting into the sky just weakens your case and wastes ammunition.
You deny the negative impact that would have without giving a counter-argument.
Shotting into the sky just weakens your case and wastes ammunition.
November 29, 2025 at 5:39 PM
You still did not bring a single argument for attempting measures that you must expect to fail.
You deny the negative impact that would have without giving a counter-argument.
Shotting into the sky just weakens your case and wastes ammunition.
You deny the negative impact that would have without giving a counter-argument.
Shotting into the sky just weakens your case and wastes ammunition.
Refusing to make sure you have a chance to hit your target is a great waste of ammo.
And when you finally need it, it is lost.
And when you finally need it, it is lost.
November 29, 2025 at 5:36 PM
Refusing to make sure you have a chance to hit your target is a great waste of ammo.
And when you finally need it, it is lost.
And when you finally need it, it is lost.
So for the fifth and last time: Yes.
Can you cite the part in the Constitution that forces lawmakers to bring articles of impeachment, even if they know they will have no success and will weaken their position?
Can you cite the part in the Constitution that forces lawmakers to bring articles of impeachment, even if they know they will have no success and will weaken their position?
November 29, 2025 at 5:35 PM
So for the fifth and last time: Yes.
Can you cite the part in the Constitution that forces lawmakers to bring articles of impeachment, even if they know they will have no success and will weaken their position?
Can you cite the part in the Constitution that forces lawmakers to bring articles of impeachment, even if they know they will have no success and will weaken their position?
I liken the Trump supporters to people in a toxic relationship.
They were warned, they estranged friends and family and are left with nothing but that abusing spouse they have invested too much in.
They do not know their way out.
They were warned, they estranged friends and family and are left with nothing but that abusing spouse they have invested too much in.
They do not know their way out.
November 29, 2025 at 5:33 PM
I liken the Trump supporters to people in a toxic relationship.
They were warned, they estranged friends and family and are left with nothing but that abusing spouse they have invested too much in.
They do not know their way out.
They were warned, they estranged friends and family and are left with nothing but that abusing spouse they have invested too much in.
They do not know their way out.
Oh Trump will hate that. He is convinced he'll live forever and does not need a successor (and of course he wants to run in 2028).
November 29, 2025 at 5:29 PM
Oh Trump will hate that. He is convinced he'll live forever and does not need a successor (and of course he wants to run in 2028).
This is not normal. This is dementia.
November 29, 2025 at 5:28 PM
This is not normal. This is dementia.
This is not normal. This is dementia.
November 29, 2025 at 5:25 PM
This is not normal. This is dementia.
Any single boob has more charisma than that douchebag.
November 29, 2025 at 5:22 PM
Any single boob has more charisma than that douchebag.
This is not normal. This is dementia.
November 29, 2025 at 5:22 PM
This is not normal. This is dementia.
We have to keep trying, indeed, but not necessarily in the same way. We have to adjust the method to be more effective.
When we have good reason to assume we do not get the necessary votes right now, we have to devise a way to get those votes. And then try again.
When we have good reason to assume we do not get the necessary votes right now, we have to devise a way to get those votes. And then try again.
November 29, 2025 at 5:19 PM
We have to keep trying, indeed, but not necessarily in the same way. We have to adjust the method to be more effective.
When we have good reason to assume we do not get the necessary votes right now, we have to devise a way to get those votes. And then try again.
When we have good reason to assume we do not get the necessary votes right now, we have to devise a way to get those votes. And then try again.
Please decode 'in the affirmative'.
November 29, 2025 at 3:04 PM
Please decode 'in the affirmative'.
For the fourth time: yes.
This starts to sound like a church liturgy...
This starts to sound like a church liturgy...
November 29, 2025 at 3:03 PM
For the fourth time: yes.
This starts to sound like a church liturgy...
This starts to sound like a church liturgy...
I only try to take unsuccessful impeachment attempts (done in the full knowledge and expectation that they will be unsuccessful) off the table. Performative posturing.
If they have a chance to successfully impeach him - go for it!
If they have a chance to successfully impeach him - go for it!
November 29, 2025 at 3:02 PM
I only try to take unsuccessful impeachment attempts (done in the full knowledge and expectation that they will be unsuccessful) off the table. Performative posturing.
If they have a chance to successfully impeach him - go for it!
If they have a chance to successfully impeach him - go for it!
That would depend on whether that was a realistic assessment or just resignation.
I will not be able to nail a pudding to a wall and I will stop trying. But maybe if I freeze it, I can make it happen. So if its not gonna work the next step must be 'Then what is gonna work? Lets do that."
I will not be able to nail a pudding to a wall and I will stop trying. But maybe if I freeze it, I can make it happen. So if its not gonna work the next step must be 'Then what is gonna work? Lets do that."
November 29, 2025 at 3:00 PM
That would depend on whether that was a realistic assessment or just resignation.
I will not be able to nail a pudding to a wall and I will stop trying. But maybe if I freeze it, I can make it happen. So if its not gonna work the next step must be 'Then what is gonna work? Lets do that."
I will not be able to nail a pudding to a wall and I will stop trying. But maybe if I freeze it, I can make it happen. So if its not gonna work the next step must be 'Then what is gonna work? Lets do that."
For the third time: Yes. (I think sometimes Bluesky swallows replies - or there are just too many postings)
November 29, 2025 at 2:58 PM
For the third time: Yes. (I think sometimes Bluesky swallows replies - or there are just too many postings)
I am taking unsuccessful impeachment attempts off the table and want a change of the setting so that it can eventually be a successful attempt.
Maybe that moment comes sooner than we think if the Epstein files bring more of the GOP to leave him.
Maybe that moment comes sooner than we think if the Epstein files bring more of the GOP to leave him.
November 29, 2025 at 2:57 PM
I am taking unsuccessful impeachment attempts off the table and want a change of the setting so that it can eventually be a successful attempt.
Maybe that moment comes sooner than we think if the Epstein files bring more of the GOP to leave him.
Maybe that moment comes sooner than we think if the Epstein files bring more of the GOP to leave him.
So - what about publicly stating that he must be impeached but the GOP is too cowardly to follow through?
And do that every day? Would that be useless?
And do that every day? Would that be useless?
November 29, 2025 at 2:52 PM
So - what about publicly stating that he must be impeached but the GOP is too cowardly to follow through?
And do that every day? Would that be useless?
And do that every day? Would that be useless?
By all means go after him. (By all legal means, I should say).
Call him out, ridicule him, sue him, call for a general strike, boycott his oligarchs, leak the Epstein Files.
Just do not choose means that leave you weaker and more vulnerable.
Call him out, ridicule him, sue him, call for a general strike, boycott his oligarchs, leak the Epstein Files.
Just do not choose means that leave you weaker and more vulnerable.
November 29, 2025 at 2:50 PM
By all means go after him. (By all legal means, I should say).
Call him out, ridicule him, sue him, call for a general strike, boycott his oligarchs, leak the Epstein Files.
Just do not choose means that leave you weaker and more vulnerable.
Call him out, ridicule him, sue him, call for a general strike, boycott his oligarchs, leak the Epstein Files.
Just do not choose means that leave you weaker and more vulnerable.
I already answered that in the affirmative.
November 29, 2025 at 2:48 PM
I already answered that in the affirmative.
I have, but I have only found Article II Section 4. Nothing that states that it is a constitutional duty of a member of Congress to bring articles of impeachment to the House when he/she believes crimes and misdemeanors have been committed.
Yet that was at the core of your argument.
Yet that was at the core of your argument.
November 29, 2025 at 2:47 PM
I have, but I have only found Article II Section 4. Nothing that states that it is a constitutional duty of a member of Congress to bring articles of impeachment to the House when he/she believes crimes and misdemeanors have been committed.
Yet that was at the core of your argument.
Yet that was at the core of your argument.
Shooting 99% of my ammo without a target in the crosshairs is as well.
November 29, 2025 at 2:39 PM
Shooting 99% of my ammo without a target in the crosshairs is as well.
I still think the impact on public opinion of continous impeachment efforts that failed are underestimated.
Also the sunk-cost argument - every time GOP lawmakers vote against it makes it harder for them to change that vote in the future.
Also the sunk-cost argument - every time GOP lawmakers vote against it makes it harder for them to change that vote in the future.
November 29, 2025 at 2:38 PM
I still think the impact on public opinion of continous impeachment efforts that failed are underestimated.
Also the sunk-cost argument - every time GOP lawmakers vote against it makes it harder for them to change that vote in the future.
Also the sunk-cost argument - every time GOP lawmakers vote against it makes it harder for them to change that vote in the future.
I think he is a rapist, a pedophile, a grifter, possibly blackmailed by Putin. I think he would like to start a war to avoid midterm elections.
So yes, but that is inconsequential, like you labelling me a pro-facist.
So yes, but that is inconsequential, like you labelling me a pro-facist.
November 29, 2025 at 2:36 PM
I think he is a rapist, a pedophile, a grifter, possibly blackmailed by Putin. I think he would like to start a war to avoid midterm elections.
So yes, but that is inconsequential, like you labelling me a pro-facist.
So yes, but that is inconsequential, like you labelling me a pro-facist.
Picking the fight with the best chances for success is a good way to win.
And where is that Constitution quote I asked you for?
And where is that Constitution quote I asked you for?
November 29, 2025 at 2:33 PM
Picking the fight with the best chances for success is a good way to win.
And where is that Constitution quote I asked you for?
And where is that Constitution quote I asked you for?
I think the debate is not about 'giving up', but about finding the means with most chances of success.
Fighting fascisms needs multiple approaches and plenty of creativity.
Fighting fascisms needs multiple approaches and plenty of creativity.
November 29, 2025 at 2:31 PM
I think the debate is not about 'giving up', but about finding the means with most chances of success.
Fighting fascisms needs multiple approaches and plenty of creativity.
Fighting fascisms needs multiple approaches and plenty of creativity.