Impeachment of Donald J. Trump

  • Thread starter Thread starter dvdjs
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
HarryStotle said:
Not exactly true. Pew has done research on the level of participation in making donations to parties. About 10% of Americans do, however…
  • Those who said they follow what is going on in government and public affairs most of the time reported donating at a rate of 28%
  • 22% of Democrats and Democratic leaners and 10% Republicans and Republican leaners reported making a donation .
  • Nearly a third (32%) of those with family incomes of $150,000 or more say they made a political donation.
  • 27% of those with family incomes of $150,000 or more said they contributed more than $250
Given that journalists meet all four of the above criteria, i.e, follow public affairs, are more likely to make a donation if Democrat, have a family income higher than $150 000 and are more likely to contribute more than $250, we could probably come up with a calculus to indicate that most of the prominent journalists who work for influential media corporations donate to the Democratic Party. The number is very likely well above 30%.

The other factor to consider is that even if only 15% of the general public donate to political parties – as the Pew study finds, there is every reason to think that – since about half vote Rep and half Dem, those stats – the numbers that donate are somewhat reflective of how they lean.

So if 87-97% of journalists who donate donate to the Dems, there is good reason to think that that proportion is reflective of how they vote.

This is an interesting article, although it is a bit dated. Journalists consistently voted 80%+ Democrat, and that figure is much higher now based on how the press attacks Trump.

Media Bias Basics
  • 81 percent of the journalists interviewed voted for the Democratic presidential candidate in every election between 1964 and 1976.
  • In the Democratic landslide of 1964, 94 percent of the press surveyed voted for President Lyndon Johnson (D) over Senator Barry Goldwater ®.
  • In 1976, the Democratic nominee, Jimmy Carter, captured the allegiance of 81 percent of the reporters surveyed while a mere 19 percent cast their ballots for President Gerald Ford.
  • Over the 16-year period, the Republican candidate always received less than 20 percent of the media elite’s vote.
Click to expand...
First, ROFL at the idea that you think journalists make more than $150000 a year. Maybe you missed that zero on the end. I think it’s closer to $30000.

Second, 87% of 15% is 13%, which doesn’t tell us squat.

Third, 40-60 year old data doesn’t tell us much.
Click to expand...
 
JapaneseKappa said:
40.png
HarryStotle:
The journalists who influence political and social views.
Click to expand...
Then you’ve got to name another source for the 87% figure, since that includes former journalists, as well as people like restaurant reviewers for local papers.

Journalists shower Hillary Clinton with campaign cash – Center for Public Integrity
Take Orange County Register restaurant critic Brad Johnson in California, who this year made dozens of small–dollar contributions to Clinton’s campaign
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Salaries are somewhat of a red herring when we actually have some indication of actual voting records of journalists, even in very specific sectors.

http://archive.mrc.org/biasbasics/biasbasics3.asp
For example:
  • In 1992, nine of the White House correspondents surveyed voted for Democrat Bill Clinton, two for Republican George H. W. Bush, and one for independent Ross Perot.
  • In 1988, 12 voted for Democrat Michael Dukakis, one for Bush.
  • In 1984, 10 voted for Democrat Walter Mondale, zero for Ronald Reagan.
  • In 1980, eight voted for Democrat Jimmy Carter, four for liberal independent John Anderson, and two voted for Ronald Reagan.
  • In 1976, 11 voted for Carter, two for Republican Gerald Ford.
Click to expand...
These aren’t restaurant reviewers, they are White House correspondents.

Or …
In 1995, Stanley Rothman and Amy E. Black “partially replicated the earlier Rothman-Lichter” survey of the media elite described above. “The sample of journalists mirrors that from the earlier study, including reporters and editors at major national newspapers, news magazines and wire services,” the authors wrote in a Spring 2001 article for the journal Public Interest. When it came to voting habits and ideology, the authors found the media elite maintained their liberal bent, providing strong majority support for Democrats Michael Dukakis in 1988 and Bill Clinton in 1992.

KEY FINDINGS:
  • More than three out of four “elite journalists,” 76 percent, reported voting for Michael Dukakis in 1988, compared to just 46 percent of the voting public.
  • An even larger percentage of top journalists, 91 percent, cast ballots for Bill Clinton in 1992.
Click to expand...
Things have only gotten worse for the “right-wing.”
 
drcube said:
Because they were closer to Trump than the other witnesses. Trump told Zelensky to work with Guiliani. So Guiliani would know what Trump said. Mulvaney admitted the quid pro quo already so we know he knows what it is. Trump has prevented evidence to be presented that would exonerate him, so I think we can safely assume what they would have to say is bad for Trump.
Click to expand...
So if any of this is against the law why is it not written into the articles of Impeachment–quid pro quo, etc…
 
drcube said:
Third, 40-60 year old data doesn’t tell us much.
Click to expand...
Sure it does. The media is far more left-wing AND more outright propagandist today than they were 40-60 years ago.

You aren’t claiming the likes of NYT, WaPo, LATimes, etc., are more right wing today than then, are you?
 
drcube said:
40.png
petra22:
So if any of this is against the law why is it not written into the articles of Impeachment–quid pro quo, etc…
Click to expand...
The articles of impeachment talk about bribery, which is illegal.
Click to expand...
Uh huh, Schiff talking about bribery in the articles of impeachment should be illegal.
 
Aquinas11 said:
🤣

“talk about” Bribery
Click to expand...
Try: conclude that he is guilty of impeachable bribery.
40.png
Impeachment of Donald J. Trump World News
Literally the document that is the subject of the thread: President Trump’s Abuse of Power Encompassed Impeachable “Bribery” and Violations of Federal Criminal Law Applying the constitutional definition of “Bribery” here, there can be little doubt that it is satisfied. President Trump solicited President Zelensky for a “favor” of great personal value to him; he did so corruptly; and he did so in a scheme to influence his own official actions respecting the release of military and security as…
Click to expand...
 
HarryStotle said:
Sure it does. The media is far more left-wing AND more outright propagandist today than they were 40-60 years ago.
Click to expand...
Yeah, using data that is more than a half century old to make a modern day point is a serioius mistake.
HarryStotle said:
You aren’t claiming the likes of NYT, WaPo, LATimes, etc., are more right wing today than then, are you?
Click to expand...
Well, golly, it’s hard to tell since I wasn’t born then.
HarryStotle said:
Uh huh, Schiff talking about bribery in the articles of impeachment should be illegal.
Click to expand...
Uh huh. That doesn’t make any sense.
Aquinas11 said:
🤣

“talk about” Bribery
Click to expand...
Ok, how about 'detail how Trump used bribery to try to extract an investigation into his political enemies by withholding funds earmarked for the Ukrainian government by Congress"?
 
Ridgerunner said:
Mulvaney actually didn’t.

What he did say is that the corruption in Ukraine dating back to 2016 was among the reasons the money was delayed. 2016 was the year in which the fake “Dossier” was generated by Ukrainian and Russian sources. Some sources also believed the DNC was hacked from Ukraine, whether by Russians or others. Since the DNC never allowed the FBI to examine its server to independently verify the source of the hack, nobody but the DNC knows to this very day where the hack came from.

Mulvaney said Trump told him that he believed Ukraine was a “corrupt place” and that he didn’t want to “send them a bunch of money.” He also said the president was concerned that other European countries weren’t doing their fair share to contribute to Ukraine’s defense.

Mulvaney added: “Did he also mention to me in the past the corruption related to the DNC server? Absolutely. No question about that. But that’s it. And that’s why we held up the money.” He added: “the look back to what happened in 2016 certainly was part of the thing that he was worried about in corruption with that nation.”

Mulvaney was certainly not talking about a “quid pro quo” personal to Trump or Biden and not related to anything happening in 2019.
Click to expand...
Thank you for saying this but those opposed to President Trump won’t listen or read it. They won’t accept it, they are too stuck on the story made up by AS…
 
Aquinas11 said:
Then Dems REALLY screwed up since didn’t charge Bribery in the articles
Click to expand...
Is there a part of this sentence that is confusing?
President Trump’s Abuse of Power Encompassed Impeachable “Bribery” and Violations of Federal Criminal Law
Click to expand...
They are saying that impeachable bribery is part of the abuse of power article, but since there were other federal criminal law violations, they upgraded the charge from bribery to abuse of power.
 
Last edited:
JapaneseKappa said:
They are saying that impeachable bribery is part of the abuse of power article,
Click to expand...
Yes you already established they screwed up by calling Article “Abuse of Power” instead of “Bribery”

Did you get Schiff on phone?? Don’t waste time
 
Aquinas11 said:
Did you get Schiff on phone?? Don’t waste time
Click to expand...
I literally quoted the document that is the subject of this thread. You can see for yourself, just click on the link by the title.
 
Last edited:
Dr. Cube if you are considering the President’s enemies as those on the Dem side who conspired to trash DT and set up an unlawful intervention into the 2016 election that should NEVER HAPPEN TO ANY PRESIDENT, then yes he did ask for investigation into the part Ukraine could have played… if it involved Joe Biden, then that’s on Joe Biden…
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top