Rand says Amash wrong to call for Trump's impeachment.

[Anti Globalist]

Amash is showing how much of a beta male he is with his recent moves.

[shakey1]

Still, surprised that JA would do this... certainly there are bigger fish.

[Cleaner44]

Why is it so hard to fathom that he put principles over politics?

Because Amash is a politician and after this he will be less effective.

When Ron Paul would take a stance, he showed the public the constitutional position of whatever bill was being proposed. Amash isn't doing anything close to that right now. He is just sharing his opinion that Trump has violated the public trust and thus should be impeached. With that as a criteria, nearly every politician should be impeached. This leaves me wondering why he didn't call for the impeachment of Obama from 2010-2016. Where were his principles on this matter back then?

I find Rand Paul to be principled and more effective.

[angelatc]

Because Amash is a politician and after this he will be less effective.

When Ron Paul would take a stance, he showed the public the constitutional position of whatever bill was being proposed. Amash isn't doing anything close to that right now. He is just sharing his opinion that Trump has violated the public trust and thus should be impeached. With that as a criteria, nearly every politician should be impeached. This leaves me wondering why he didn't call for the impeachment of Obama from 2010-2016. Where were his principles on this matter back then?

I find Rand Paul to be principled and more effective.

I am not interested in playing ¿Quién es más macholibertarian? or whataboutObamaisms.

Amash's position is absolutely the constitutional position. He succinctly believes that Trumps actions meet the legal definition of obstruction and as such, Congress has a duty.

We may believe that Trump acted passively through the whole fiasco and would never intentionally try to impede the investigators, but Amash has reached a different conclusion.

But just for a moment, let us entertain the idea that perhaps this is indeed a 100 percent political move. So what? Are we seriously upset that small-government-minded Amash is besmirching the good name of Donald $#@!ing Trump?

[Cap]

I am not interested in playing ¿Quién es más macholibertarian? or whataboutObamaisms.

Amash's position is absolutely the constitutional position. He succinctly believes that Trumps actions meet the legal definition of obstruction and as such, Congress has a duty.

We may believe that Trump acted passively through the whole fiasco and would never intentionally try to impede the investigators, but Amash has reached a different conclusion.

But just for a moment, let us entertain the idea that perhaps this is indeed a 100 percent political move. So what? Are we seriously upset that small-government-minded Amash is besmirching the good name of Donald $#@!ing Trump?

That's going to tighten some sphincters.

[UWDude]

Are we seriously upset that small-government-minded Amash is besmirching the good name of Donald $#@!ing Trump?

Amash is participating in a coup. It's more than just besmirching the name of trump.

Anybody pushing the Russian collusion narrative is really really stupid, or a traitor.

for his sake, I am going to just assume Amash is plum stupid, because if he knows there is no collusion, but still pushes the narrative, like he has, then he can hang with the rest.

[nikcers]

But just for a moment, let us entertain the idea that perhaps this is indeed a 100 percent political move. So what? Are we seriously upset that small-government-minded Amash is besmirching the good name of Donald $#@!ing Trump?

This is how Rand was treated when he voted against Trumps national emergency I don't know why people are suprised JA is treated this way. Whether you agree with either of them on principle its a sign that TDS works on liberty lovers too

[angelatc]

Amash is participating in a coup. It's more than just besmirching the name of trump.

Anybody pushing the Russian collusion narrative is really really stupid, or a traitor.

I know you can't see it, but this....this.....this.... statement. Irony.

Just, wow.

Please point me to the evidence that Amash ever said he believed Trump colluded with Russia.

[angelatc]

This is how Rand was treated when he voted against Trumps national emergency I don't know why people are suprised JA is treated this way. Whether you agree with either of them on principle its a sign that TDS works on liberty lovers too

And that is what makes politicians successful. They know full well that facts will never win an emotional argument. They feed off making us alternate between cheering and sobbing.

[UWDude]

Please point me to the evidence that Amash ever said he believed Trump colluded with Russia.

what, you have swordsmyth on block or something?

He just posted multiple Amash tweets where Amash was berating trump for the way he behaved with Putin, insinuating Trump was controlled by Russia.

And I am quite sure it was in direct response to you asking him the exact same question you just asked me. (and i dont recall you giving any explanation for amash's russian collusion delusion tweets either when swordsmyth posted them... ...still trying to come up with the perfect "callng trump an agent of Putin is just Amash being principled!" id advise not trying. it wont work).

So either you put smyrh on ignore after you asked the question, or you are just choosing to ignore Amash has been on the collusion train from day one.

and now Amash is calling for impeachment, for "betraying the public trust" by not cooperating fully enough with the coup.

[UWDude]

This is how Rand was treated when he voted against Trumps national emergency I don't know why people are suprised JA is treated this way. Whether you agree with either of them on principle its a sign that TDS works on liberty lovers too

wrong. I for one respected Rands vote.

[nikcers]

wrong. I for one respected Rands vote.

yeah but if you saw the reaction on reddit on twitter it was not very nice

[UWDude]

yeah but if you saw the reaction on reddit on twitter it was not very nice

i did see the reaction on reddit. Rand still had many defenders, even though the_donald has had tons of purges that kicked out many rand types (because of foreign policy).

[nikcers]

i did see the reaction on reddit. Rand still had many defenders, even though the_donald has had tons of purges that kicked out many rand types (because of foreign policy).

They are just echo chambers that spin bizarre talking points. The one on twitter was literally Rand Paul is the reason why there is no southern border wall and that he needs to stop blocking the president.

[Cleaner44]

I am not interested in playing ¿Quién es más macholibertarian? or whataboutObamaisms.

Amash's position is absolutely the constitutional position. He succinctly believes that Trumps actions meet the legal definition of obstruction and as such, Congress has a duty.

We may believe that Trump acted passively through the whole fiasco and would never intentionally try to impede the investigators, but Amash has reached a different conclusion.

But just for a moment, let us entertain the idea that perhaps this is indeed a 100 percent political move. So what? Are we seriously upset that small-government-minded Amash is besmirching the good name of Donald $#@!ing Trump?

I can't speak for we but for myself and I can't get upset about any besmirching the good name of Donald Trump because he has never had a good name to me. I always found him to be a big NY blowhard and didn't appreciate him besmirching the good name of Ron Paul.

This is very simple to me. Trump is NOT going to be impeached. Aligning oneself politically with Maxine Waters is beyond stupid. Standing against a president that is slashing regulations and reducing government interference in markets doesn't win many allies in Republican circles.

I just think the approach of Rand Paul makes more sense. Trump is a guy that is willing to listen to points of view ranging from John Bolton to Rand Paul. It seems smarter to me to stay on good terms with Trump and attempt to influence him in a more liberty direction. Its ok if we disagree.

[ARealConservative]

Rand Paul is the convenient libertarian, he turns that ideology on and off as it suits him. Regardless, Amash is more of a constitutionalist that a libertarian so it is consistent with his MO to call for impeachment when he think a president has committed high crime. I don't agree with him in this instance, just wish he would up his threshold to bigger crimes like starting unauthorized wars.

I wish this was true. he is essentially agreeing with Comey that the FBI is an independent arm - which is a complete fabrication and totally at odds with the constitution

[ARealConservative]

Amash's position is absolutely the constitutional position. He succinctly believes that Trumps actions meet the legal definition of obstruction and as such, Congress has a duty.

yes - a living and breathing constitution. Apparently the DOJ is now the 4th equal branch independent of POTUS.

[Swordsmyth]

I am not interested in playing ¿Quién es más macholibertarian? or whataboutObamaisms.

Amash's position is absolutely the constitutional position. He succinctly believes that Trumps actions meet the legal definition of obstruction and as such, Congress has a duty.

We may believe that Trump acted passively through the whole fiasco and would never intentionally try to impede the investigators, but Amash has reached a different conclusion.

But just for a moment, let us entertain the idea that perhaps this is indeed a 100 percent political move. So what? Are we seriously upset that small-government-minded Amash is besmirching the good name of Donald $#@!ing Trump?

Amash's position is NOT EVEN CLOSE to Constitutional and I don't believe he believes it, he is jumping on the MSM/Demoncrat witch Hunt and endorsing treason for perceived political (and possibly personal) gain and we should be VERY upset about that.

[Swordsmyth]

I know you can't see it, but this....this.....this.... statement. Irony.

Just, wow.

Please point me to the evidence that Amash ever said he believed Trump colluded with Russia.

I gave it to you but apparently you reacted like this:

[Cleaner44]

And that is what makes politicians successful. They know full well that facts will never win an emotional argument. They feed off making us alternate between cheering and sobbing.

This is 100% true. The population doesn't care about the constitution or the national debt. Facts and math don't matter as much as emotions.

I see the left as more emotion driven than the right, but not by a whole lot.

This also means that the principles that Amash is supposedly standing for won't matter as much as the emotional discord he is causing. The reality is that those of us here that care about the constitution as a very small minority compared to the masses of voters... and always will be. Learning that over the last 12 years is what causes me to say that Amash is being stupid.

[Swordsmyth]

This is 100% true. The population doesn't care about the constitution or the national debt. Facts and math don't matter as much as emotions.

I see the left as more emotion driven than the right, but not by a whole lot.

This also means that the principles that Amash is supposedly standing for won't matter as much as the emotional discord he is causing. The reality is that those of us here that care about the constitution as a very small minority compared to the masses of voters... and always will be. Learning that over the last 12 years is what causes me to say that Amash is being stupid.

And Amash is making an emotional argument against Trump NOT a Constitutional one.

He is WRONG.

[r3volution 3.0]

Rand's strategy of cozying up to Trump is stupid. It doesn't influence Trump, or win over his supporters; it just weakens the liberty movement.

Actually impeaching Trump would also be stupid; it would only martyrize Trump and strengthen his movement.

That said, since Trump obviously isn't going to be impeached, calling for it (as Amash did) is probably a good idea.

Libertarians must start recreating some distance between themselves and Trump; Amash is doing this, Rand isn't.

Something I have observed over the years is that Libertarianism is pretty ironic in true practice. While preaching individualism and liberty, anyone who deviates from 100% rank and file lock step with the doctrine principles is stoned and persecuted as not worthy, even to the point of wanting excommunication from the public square. While the principles are sound, the true example in practice is hypocritical and anti-individualism. It's just like the Constitutional party claiming they "support Constitutional freedom of religion" just as long as it is a "recognized form of Christianity".

There's no hypocrisy in that. How big the tent should be as a practical matter is debatable (balancing the risk of isolation v. the risk of dilution), but there is nothing violative of any libertarian principle in calling out non-libertarians as such, criticizing them, or in excluding them from an organization, meeting, etc.

I am not interested in playing ¿Quién es más macholibertarian? or whataboutObamaisms.

Amash's position is absolutely the constitutional position. He succinctly believes that Trumps actions meet the legal definition of obstruction and as such, Congress has a duty.

We may believe that Trump acted passively through the whole fiasco and would never intentionally try to impede the investigators, but Amash has reached a different conclusion.

But just for a moment, let us entertain the idea that perhaps this is indeed a 100 percent political move. So what? Are we seriously upset that small-government-minded Amash is besmirching the good name of Donald $#@!ing Trump?

Exactly

This is all a political game; the only sensible position for us is to hope that our political enemies lose.

I give exactly zero $#@!s about the legalities of impeachment, the Russia investigation, etc.

...nor do 99.99% of Trumpers.

[ATruepatriot]

There's no hypocrisy in that. How big the tent should be as a practical matter is debatable (balancing the risk of isolation v. the risk of dilution), but there is nothing violative of any libertarian principle in calling out non-libertarians as such, criticizing them, or in excluding them from an organization, meeting, etc.

Sure it is... It's hypocritical radical extremism, and radical all or nothing extremism is what destroys even the most righteous of ideology in everything. Ironic that someone who is hell bent on independent liberty creed for each individual would denounce someone else for exercising that very same independent individualism of creed because it differs from their own.

"I support you being an individual to think as you like, just as long as you think 100% just like me..."

By example It's the very definition of hypocrisy...

[PursuePeace]

This is very simple to me. Trump is NOT going to be impeached. Aligning oneself politically with Maxine Waters is beyond stupid. Standing against a president that is slashing regulations and reducing government interference in markets doesn't win many allies in Republican circles.

I just think the approach of Rand Paul makes more sense. Trump is a guy that is willing to listen to points of view ranging from John Bolton to Rand Paul. It seems smarter to me to stay on good terms with Trump and attempt to influence him in a more liberty direction. Its ok if we disagree.

I agree.

[r3volution 3.0]

Sure it is... It's hypocritical radical extremism, and radical all or nothing extremism is what destroys even the most righteous of ideology in everything. Ironic that someone who is hell bent on independent liberty creed for each individual would denounce someone else for exercising that very same independent individualism of creed because it differs from their own.

"I support you being an individual to think as you like, just as long as you think 100% just like me..."

By example It's the very definition of hypocrisy...

I believe X, Bob believes Y.

Bob and I have different goals.

I tell Bob this.

This is hypocritical...?

[ATruepatriot]

I believe X, Bob believes Y.

Bob and I have different goals.

I tell Bob this.

This is hypocritical...?

You know that is not at all what you presented. I'm done for the day, off to bed.

[r3volution 3.0]

You know that is not at all what you presented. I'm done for the day, off to bed.

I said:

there is nothing violative of any libertarian principle in calling out non-libertarians as such, criticizing them, or in excluding them from an organization, meeting, etc.

So, I'm a libertarian, Bob isn't, I tell him so, and don't invite him to the treehouse.

...where's the hypocrisy?

There's no principle of libertarianism mandating that you hang out with and assist your enemies.

[enhanced_deficit]

Heaven forbid, if Right Constitutional purists plus Left grudge score settlers succeeded to impeach MAGA, that would not only bring to power Pence ( who is way too Christian and Biblical minded for modern liberal socialism leaning diverse America) but would also cause irreparable harm to rising GOP-neocon wing sinking top donors massive investment in MAGA. Not only Iran war, various other globalist interventionist projects as well as domestic gov spending could also see some slow down. All progress made on DACA deal with Pelosi/Schumer or with NK, LGBT civil rights would also go to waste.

[Swordsmyth]

Heaven forbid, if Right Constitutional purists plus Left grudge score settlers succeeded to impeach MAGA, that would not only bring to power Pence ( who is way too Christian and Biblical minded for modern liberal socialism leaning diverse America) but would also cause irreparable harm to rising GOP-neocon wing sinking top donors massive investment in MAGA. Not only Iran war, various other globalist interventionist projects as well as domestic gov spending could also see some slow down. All progress made on DACA deal with Pelosi/Schumer or with NK, LGBT civil rights would also go to waste.

Pence would be a windfall to the Neocons.

[enhanced_deficit]

Pence would be a windfall to the Neocons.

Are you implying MAGA did not surround himself with the best?

Your comment suggests he surrounded himself with neocons swamp, why would a self-funded America-Firster do that?


Sometimes it seems as if even MAGA's supporters don't believe in his judgments. Disparaging Bolton, Pompeo was one thing but now you seem to be attcaking even his VP pick who is a heartbeat away from becoming President. If like Coulter, GOA leaders now you have started seeing MAGA as a 'scam' also, at least say it openly instead of such attacks on his top picks.