View Full Version : US Politics Thread 2016-2020
ikalugin
12-11-19, 09:14 PM
personal prediction, Trump wins 2020 and isn't removed by impeachment.
Democrat government in power for 2024.
there.
Personally I think it may get worse for the Democrats before it gets better, with them also loosing 2024 elections.
Because if Trump is not impeached, if Trump gets re-elected they may double down and shoot themselves in the foot.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5YYeneZOt-0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K7LHeV215vI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nf6rJtoOL9c
<O>
Cybermat47
12-12-19, 09:56 PM
Breaking News: Donald Trump pulls his hair out
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/why-time-picking-greta-thunberg-will-drive-donald-trump-crazy/ar-AAK1pEh
Why Time picking Greta Thunberg will drive Donald Trump crazy
Nothing like seeing the most powerful man in the world being triggered by a 16 year old girl with autism.
The President is a snowflake, but at least he’s honest. The Democrats, meanwhiles, are corrupt liars, which is why they lost to him.
At least the memes are good.
http://forums.sailinganarchy.com/uploads/monthly_2018_05/DcyvwK6VwAAyJ6f.thumb.jpg.1bd78355d088f7736b5c7ef8 14170c34.jpg
Rockstar
12-13-19, 07:40 AM
https://truthfeednews.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/ADAM-SCHIFF-COUNTER-FISA-009-01-e1516973749389.jpg
Rockstar
12-13-19, 07:44 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PHyfCo1APO8
Now let's watch Gaetz get slammed by his own substance abuse record of a DUI arrest and watch how Gaetz, and his GOP ochorts, really have no response at all in Gaetz's defense; as Johnson said "The silence is deafening"...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=37a97TWcEnc
Gaetz's 2008 DUI resurfaces during impeachment debate --
https://www.rollcall.com/news/video/gaetzs-2008-dui-resurfaces-during-impeachment-debate
You would think any sensible, intelligent, person, in particular a member of Congress, before he brings up in public, before national TV and Web coverage, an accusation on someone else, would have the wits and awareness such a course of action would lead to a examination of their own background; but I did mention 'sensible, intelligent, wits, and awareness' and we should know better than to expect any of that from the GOP clowns populating the House Judiciary Committee...
Rep. Johnson made the 'pot and kettle' comparison, but, I think, given how so many of the GOP's attempts to be clever or to attempt to take the moral/ethical high ground have blown up in their faces, perhaps it is not a matter of 'pots and kettles', but, rather, the GOP/Trump/Trump minions/Trumpettes seeming addiction to living in "Glass Houses"...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EFq3Zb1Gv6k
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tGcai7Bp1H8
<O>
u crank
12-13-19, 09:00 AM
https://i.imgur.com/pxeqeDN.jpg
Rockstar
12-13-19, 09:54 AM
Now let's watch Gaetz get slammed by his own substance abuse record of a DUI arrest and watch how Gaetz, and his GOP ochorts, really have no response at all in Gaetz's defense; as Johnson said "The silence is deafening"...
Gaetz's 2008 DUI resurfaces during impeachment debate --
You would think any sensible, intelligent, person, in particular a member of Congress, before he brings up in public, before national TV and Web coverage, an accusation on someone else, would have the wits and awareness such a course of action would lead to a examination of their own background; but I did mention 'sensible, intelligent, wits, and awareness' and we should know better than to expect any of that from the GOP clowns populating the House Judiciary Committee...
Rep. Johnson made the 'pot and kettle' comparison, but, I think, given how so many of the GOP's attempts to be clever or to attempt to take the moral/ethical high ground have blown up in their faces, perhaps it is not a matter of 'pots and kettles', but, rather, the GOP/Trump/Trump minions/Trumpettes seeming addiction to living in "Glass Houses"...
<O>
Let me remind everyone this isnt' about Gaetz and his history. Its about the accusation of bribery and abuse of power made against the president. IMO Gaetz was pointing out a brief history of the Biden's association with one of the most corrupt businesses in Ukraine and a reason why Trump may have asked about the Biden's. Timeline be damned, unless the statute of limitations has run its course, Gaetz brought to light a valid point. glass houses :roll:
Personally I think Gaetz was doing Joe a favor by shining the light directly on Hunter.
Im trying to understand the impeachment stuff so far I got, bla bla trump, bla bla biden, bla bla Ukraine bla bla no quid pro, bla bla lying.
Is that right? :hmmm:
Im trying to understand the impeachment stuff so far I got, bla bla trump, bla bla biden, bla bla Ukraine bla bla no quid pro, bla bla lying.
Is that right? :hmmm:
Have you tried connecting the bla bla's? :hmmm:
Rockstar
12-13-19, 02:19 PM
Im trying to understand the impeachment stuff so far I got, bla bla trump, bla bla biden, bla bla Ukraine bla bla no quid pro, bla bla lying.
Is that right? :hmmm:
dont forget the late night comedy shows. oh and do try to keep up quid pro quo fizzled out weeks ago we've moved on. :D
AVGWarhawk
12-13-19, 02:45 PM
Im trying to understand the impeachment stuff so far I got, bla bla trump, bla bla biden, bla bla Ukraine bla bla no quid pro, bla bla lying.
Is that right? :hmmm:
To translate: Bla bla(made stuff up). Bla bla(broad swipe of the pen to what high crimes means). Bla bla(lets look serious so these articles of impeachment look serious because...well they are made up and not serious).
Thank you Wiki.
AVGWarhawk
12-13-19, 02:49 PM
Now let's watch Gaetz get slammed by his own substance abuse record of a DUI arrest and watch how Gaetz, and his GOP ochorts, really have no response at all in Gaetz's defense; as Johnson said "The silence is deafening"...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=37a97TWcEnc
Gaetz's 2008 DUI resurfaces during impeachment debate --
https://www.rollcall.com/news/video/gaetzs-2008-dui-resurfaces-during-impeachment-debate
You would think any sensible, intelligent, person, in particular a member of Congress, before he brings up in public, before national TV and Web coverage, an accusation on someone else, would have the wits and awareness such a course of action would lead to a examination of their own background; but I did mention 'sensible, intelligent, wits, and awareness' and we should know better than to expect any of that from the GOP clowns populating the House Judiciary Committee...
Rep. Johnson made the 'pot and kettle' comparison, but, I think, given how so many of the GOP's attempts to be clever or to attempt to take the moral/ethical high ground have blown up in their faces, perhaps it is not a matter of 'pots and kettles', but, rather, the GOP/Trump/Trump minions/Trumpettes seeming addiction to living in "Glass Houses"...
<O>
Guam will capsize at any time. :doh::doh::doh::doh::doh:
This gentleman is an idiot.
AVGWarhawk
12-13-19, 02:50 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PHyfCo1APO8
Hunter Biden is busy bedding his dead brothers wife and siring a child with another woman. He is a real piece of work. I think the stink on Hunter Biden runs deeper then we know.
AVGWarhawk
12-13-19, 02:53 PM
I was being facetious. :O:
I was being serious. :D
Guam will capsize at any time. :doh::doh::doh::doh::doh:
This gentleman is an idiot.
That's putting it mildly.
Onkel Neal
12-13-19, 06:59 PM
https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2019/12/13/11/22197886-7789101-image-a-307_1576235804454.jpg
Dude! Spoiler alert that stuff!
Rockstar
12-13-19, 10:08 PM
https://media.giphy.com/media/l0ErXGD5BHDrznWbm/giphy.gifhttps://media.giphy.com/media/lqVVqkqMolh9S/giphy.gif
https://media.giphy.com/media/jq0NLE6CmO8Bcek4Bj/giphy.gifhttps://media.giphy.com/media/lAiDZLgYi1dQs/giphy.gif
Onkel Neal
12-14-19, 09:20 AM
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/elections-2020/democrats-agree-on-one-thing-theyre-very-very-nervous/ar-AAK5nO8
Fear That Good News for the President is Bad News for the Democrats
The stock market is roaring. Unemployment is at a record low. The economy added 266,000 new jobs in November. Though these things are objectively good, of course, they are less good if you are a Democrat and you don’t want the current president to get credit for anything that might help him get re-elected.
It's so little reported, how well the economy is doing. If Obama was in office now we would be hearing about the great economic boom.
Mr Quatro
12-14-19, 10:39 AM
It's so little reported, how well the economy is doing. If Obama was in office now we would be hearing about the great economic boom.
With that kind of news? If Obama was office they would be promoting and voting on a third term :yep:
Buddahaid
12-14-19, 10:54 AM
Christmas bump of temp jobs.
Rockstar
12-14-19, 03:28 PM
Just an FYI these real honest to goodness lawyers having a constructive Q&A. It should be easy to discern the difference between them and armchair lawyers. Unfortunetly you wont see Schiff offering any legal opinions here. I think he's too busy making the rounds on those late night comedy shows.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=9G3BTOwwqTs
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=5pj1k3CTpss
FeatsOfStrength
12-14-19, 03:52 PM
Hunter Biden is busy bedding his dead brothers wife and siring a child with another woman. He is a real piece of work. I think the stink on Hunter Biden runs deeper then we know.
Donald Trump slept with porn star Stormy Daniels, and then with Karen McDougal and paid both of them off with campaign funds. Michael Cohen went to jail for it... all whilst married to the First Lady, Melania Trump. Donald Trump used the money from his charitable foundation as his personal piggy bank without giving a penny to charity (until forced by court order), including money from a veteran's fundraiser. Donald Trump dodged the draft due to "Bone Spurs" and denigrated John McCain an American war hero. Man, this list could go on all day..
He is a real piece of work. I think the stink on Donald Trump runs deeper than we know.
Donald Trump slept with porn star Stormy Daniels, and then with Karen McDougal and paid both of them off with campaign funds. Michael Cohen went to jail for it... all whilst married to the First Lady, Melania Trump. Donald Trump used the money from his charitable foundation as his personal piggy bank without giving a penny to charity (until forced by court order), including money from a veteran's fundraiser. Donald Trump dodged the draft due to "Bone Spurs" and denigrated John McCain an American war hero. Man, this list could go on all day..
He is a real piece of work. I think the stink on Donald Trump runs deeper than we know.
So what?
The nation knew all about Trump when we elected him. The Democrats hypocritically want to pretend they are morally outraged but the fact is they were perfectly fine with all of that stuff until he became a Republican, just like they were fine with that sexual predator Bill Clinton raping his way through two terms as president, flying out to orgy island what 0ver 20 times with his pedophile buddy Epstein to molest underage girls.
The real stinky pieces of work are the Democrats and I think the next election will reflect that.
FeatsOfStrength
12-14-19, 07:00 PM
So what?
The nation knew all about Trump when we elected him. The Democrats hypocritically want to pretend they are morally outraged but the fact is they were perfectly fine with all of that stuff until he became a Republican, just like they were fine with that sexual predator Bill Clinton raping his way through two terms as president, flying out to orgy island what 0ver 20 times with his pedophile buddy Epstein to molest underage girls.
The real stinky pieces of work are the Democrats and I think the next election will reflect that.
Well actually in the examples of misconduct, the actual affairs are not the issue it's the fact that he used campaign funds to try and shut down the story that is the issue, breaking the law.
It's the same with the current impeachment hearings, it's not the "deep state" or Democrats with a chip on their shoulder trying to take him down for partisan reasons, it's literally the fact that President Trump committed misconduct in asking a foreign government to investigate his main political rival in the forthcoming election. The White House doesn't even deny it, which is sad considering if he had any actual intent on investigating serious misconduct connected to the democrats he would have asked the DOJ to do it, not back channels involving Rudy Giuliani and the resulting Quid Pro Quo shakedown of the Ukranian Government who he only wanted to announce an investigation, clearly so he would be able to use it against Biden in 2020.
I'm not a liberal by any stretch of the word, but I can still see that this is seriously wrong and that the credibility of the United States fundamental democratic and constitutional ideals are in serious doubt if there are no consequences.
Well actually in the examples of misconduct, the actual affairs are not the issue it's the fact that he used campaign funds to try and shut down the story that is the issue, breaking the law.
But he didn't use campaign funds, he used his own funds which he is legally able to do. Believe me if there was any substance to those charges congress would certainly have included them in order to bolster their impeachment coup attempt. It is so ridiculously weak they could not have passed it up but there is no case there and they know it.
As for Biden just because he is running for the democrat party nomination it does not make him immune to investigation of past crimes as much as the liberals want that to be the de facto law of the land. Biden bragged publicly about his own quid pro quo effort and Trump has every right to make sure that he's not going to get away with it, just as he has every right to make sure Ukraine is going to take their corruption issues seriously before we hand over a boatload of lethal aid. Given what happened to that billion dollars Biden used to get the heat off his kid it's a perfectly reasonable request to make.
Onkel Neal
12-14-19, 08:49 PM
Donald Trump slept with porn star Stormy Daniels, and then with Karen McDougal and paid both of them off with campaign funds. Michael Cohen went to jail for it... all whilst married to the First Lady, Melania Trump. Donald Trump used the money from his charitable foundation as his personal piggy bank without giving a penny to charity (until forced by court order), including money from a veteran's fundraiser. Donald Trump dodged the draft due to "Bone Spurs" and denigrated John McCain an American war hero. Man, this list could go on all day..
He is a real piece of work. I think the stink on Donald Trump runs deeper than we know.
You're right, I won't argue with any of that. Trump is pretty much the worst person as President I've seen in my lifetime. But, what was the alternative in 2016? Do I need to post that picture again?:03: Is 2020 going to offer us a better alternative?
Even though Trump is a bona fide huckster and degenerate, you have to admit he is getting a few things right. The economy is has responded to tax cuts and trimming regulations, he's called China out for their bad practices, and he is attempting to limit illegal immigration (while the Dems want to throw the borders wide open and provide tax payer funded health care to illegals).
Even though Trump is a bona fide huckster and degenerate, you have to admit he is getting a few things right. The economy is has responded to tax cuts and trimming regulations, he's called China out for their bad practices, and he is attempting to limit illegal immigration (while the Dems want to throw the borders wide open and provide tax payer funded health care to illegals).
As well as put a couple Constitutionalist judges onto the supreme court, another 200 some odd lower court justices, USMCA and of course continuing to piss off all the right people.
Onkel Neal
12-14-19, 11:54 PM
Yes, I overlooked the Supreme Court judges. I am glad that we are able to disagree but I don't think "pissing off the right people" is commendable.
Yes, I overlooked the Supreme Court judges. I am glad that we are able to disagree but I don't think "pissing off the right people" is commendable.
We'll have to agree to disagree then as it is the thing I like about Trump the most. The way I see it the democratic party has betrayed the nation with this refusal to accept the 2016 election and there ought to be some consequences for it.
The only real simplification I can find in all of this, (as things have become more polarised), there is an obvious pattern
the 'left' (Democrats US, Labour UK, Socialist across Europe) keeps losng because their message is generally:
'Our nation is inherently bad, our culture is toxic, our system is broken, You should feel bad and ashamed'.
The right (Rebublicans, Conservatives) are saying Our nation is good, the sytem more or less works, you should feel proud and belive in it.
Case and point, things are not currently that bad for most people, so obviously the latter is going resonate more often.
10 years ago there was probably alot more of an appetite for some kind of Socialist or Libertarian revolution than there is now.
FeatsOfStrength
12-15-19, 05:21 AM
You're right, I won't argue with any of that. Trump is pretty much the worst person as President I've seen in my lifetime. But, what was the alternative in 2016? Do I need to post that picture again?:03: Is 2020 going to offer us a better alternative?
Even though Trump is a bona fide huckster and degenerate, you have to admit he is getting a few things right. The economy is has responded to tax cuts and trimming regulations, he's called China out for their bad practices, and he is attempting to limit illegal immigration (while the Dems want to throw the borders wide open and provide tax payer funded health care to illegals).
I agree with you on the economy, though I think his foreign policy leaves much to be desired. Free trade used to be one of the main pillars of Republican policy, putting tariffs on allies not to mention cooling of international relationships with allies (look at what happened at the NATO summit).. it's just asking to be knocked out of the top spot in favour of China, which is rapidly expanding it's new markets & influence across the world in many cases taking advantage of opportunities missed by the US, particularly in the past 3 years, China has been increasingly militarising and expanding it's influence.
I want him to do well as president but i'm not convinced it's not short term gain, or that he really cares about anything other than his ego.
The monkey with a hammer anology of Trump was pretty good.
he often hits a vase or a mirror, but every now and then he hits a nail.
Skybird
12-15-19, 07:15 AM
Whether the "economic gains" of lil boy'S doing are there to last, and even are of the suvstance to actually call them gains, is to be debated, and they all came at a cost. China so far has not so much been called out,l but they cooly countered him, bliocked him out, and needed to make practically no big concessions at all. In his typical style, lil boy makes a big ego show with firework of it. I have linked tto economic assessments before that absolutely differ from any assessment seeing the economy as doing great. To me and many others, it looks oike a straw fire. And the bill for it is coming. Also, the job structure has been shifted even further into the region of where people work like crazy to get over the day and month, but cannot build reserves for their future. This is no sustaining policy one should label as econiomic success. its social dynamite. With china having learned that it must work for unlinking itself from the US even further, the reuslt is that China is growing STRONGER, not weaker. Nobody has called anyone to order here. The military balance has shifted further towards the Chinese.
With the deficit roaring high in the sky and debts exploding, with stockmarkets heating up like a solar flare and assets beign fundamentally overvalued, with stock investors needing to take hilarious risks, all this doe snot look like an economic success story to me. More like a dance on a cooking volcano. The chief casper makes grimaces, and the mob hoots.
Reminds of the 20s.
Rockstar
12-15-19, 08:25 AM
China, which is rapidly expanding it's new markets & influence across the world in many cases taking advantage of opportunities missed by the US, particularly in the past 3 years, China has been increasingly militarising and expanding it's influence.
Bingo! I think you just partly explained why U.S. trade policies with China have changed. We have gone from an 'unprecedented scope of cooperation" stated in the 2015 U.S. National Strategy. Then as we watched China's unprecedented growth we went to 'must compete’ and ‘compete with all tools’ in the 2017 report.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/panosmourdoukoutas/2019/01/24/us-china-trade-war-the-official-and-unofficial-reasons-behind-it/
It doesnt have jack squat to do with one mans ego, orange hair, trump bad man etc etc. It's competitive business practice and national interests. Of course there is no doubt it will always be used in one way or another for political hay by both parties. Nor is China some unstoppable sly economic juggernaut outsmarting outplaying the world.
Whether the "economic gains" of lil boy'S doing are there to last, and even are of the suvstance to actually call them gains, is to be debated, and they all came at a cost. China so far has not so much been called out,l but they cooly countered him, bliocked him out, and needed to make practically no big concessions at all. In his typical style, lil boy makes a big ego show with firework of it. I have linked tto economic assessments before that absolutely differ from any assessment seeing the economy as doing great. To me and many others, it looks oike a straw fire. And the bill for it is coming. Also, the job structure has been shifted even further into the region of where people work like crazy to get over the day and month, but cannot build reserves for their future. This is no sustaining policy one should label as econiomic success. its social dynamite. With china having learned that it must work for unlinking itself from the US even further, the reuslt is that China is growing STRONGER, not weaker. Nobody has called anyone to order here. The military balance has shifted further towards the Chinese.
With the deficit roaring high in the sky and debts exploding, with stockmarkets heating up like a solar flare and assets beign fundamentally overvalued, with stock investors needing to take hilarious risks, all this doe snot look like an economic success story to me. More like a dance on a cooking volcano. The chief casper makes grimaces, and the mob hoots.
Reminds of the 20s.
Well it almost is the 20's :P
Onkel Neal
12-15-19, 02:09 PM
Well it almost is the 20's :P
How dare you!
Well according to Skybird this may all just be a secret Trumpian plot to fool everyone into voting for Putin or whatever he's ranting about lately, but personally I have been making money hand over fist, especially in the last two years, as his policies and the tax cuts have taken effect. This has happened not because of investments but through regular wage increases and i am not the only one seeing it either. Just about everyone in my industry has had their boats lifted by the same orange tide.
Rockstar
12-15-19, 03:25 PM
Speaking of making money hand over fist.
https://theintercept.com/2019/12/12/the-inspector-generals-report-on-2016-fb-i-spying-reveals-a-scandal-of-historic-magnitude-not-only-for-the-fbi-but-also-the-u-s-media/
JUST AS WAS TRUE when the Mueller investigation closed without a single American being charged with criminally conspiring with Russia over the 2016 election, Wednesday’s issuance of the long-waited report from the Department of Justice’s Inspector General reveals that years of major claims and narratives from the U.S. media were utter frauds
Interesting article:
You may accept the opening lines of the Horowitz Report that the FBI did not act with political bias over the course of its investigation. Or you can find a clearer understanding in Attorney General William Barr’s summary (https://www.yahoo.com/news/no-bias-spying-trump-17-225312985.html) of the Report: “that the FBI launched an intrusive investigation of a U.S. presidential campaign on the thinnest of suspicions.” You will need to reconcile the grotesque use the information the FBI gathered was put to after Trump was elected, the fuel for the Mueller investigation, and years’ worth of media picking at the Russian scab.
The current Horowitz Report, read alongside his previous report on how the FBI played inside the 2016 election vis-a-vis Clinton, should leave no doubt that the Bureau tried to influence the election of a president and then delegitimize him when he won. It wasn’t the Russians; it was us. And if you walk away concluding that the FBI fumbled things, acted amateurishly, failed to do what some claim they set out to do, well, just wait until next time.
On a personal note, if any of this is news to you, you may want to ask why you are only learning about it now. The American Conservative has been one of the few outlets that’s consistently exposed the Steele Dossier as part of an information op nearly since it was unveiled, and which has explained how the FISA court was manipulated, and which has steadily raised the question of political interference in our last election by American intelligence services. We claim no magical powers or inside information. To those of us who have been on the fringes of intelligence work, what was obvious just from the publicly available information was, well, obvious.
If you are reading any of this for the first time, or know people who are reading bastardized MSM versions of it for the first time, you might ask yourself why those outlets went along with Steele, et al. Their journalists are no dumber or smarter than ours. They do, however, write with a different agenda. Keep that in mind as we flip the calendar page to 2020.
https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/can-we-impeach-the-fbi-now/
Rockstar
12-15-19, 08:17 PM
So its been quite evident, to me anyway, the impeachment hearing was fueled by hearsay. But I always thought hearsay isnt admisable in a trial even one held in the senate. I wonder how thats gonna work.
I wish Schiff was around to explain this but hes seems to have dropped out of sight. Hell Im still waiting for the hard evidence he claimed to have had of f the 2016 Russian election conspiracy.
Pelosi was right when she said this would be divisive. Looks like Pelosi lost her grip and Schiff is the democrats new cock of the walk.
From what i understand, few Americans actually care that much about this impeachment business.
FeatsOfStrength
12-16-19, 09:47 AM
From what i understand, few Americans actually care that much about this impeachment business.
Well as someone who was born in the USA but has been a naturalised UK citizen for the past 15 years I find it hard to comprehend how people in the US have managed to become so entrenched in their partisan caves that they have fully lost the ability to reason or understand anything that is not the Democrat/Republican shadow on the wall.
Politics, international relations and the mechanisms of law and government are more complicated than a yin/yang yes or no, it's the same with the current Impeachment. The party you support isn't important here, it's A) the accusation's made against the President. B) Whether or not the accusations are duly founded and C) What the appropriate response is in lines with the Constitution.
So far I haven't seen any valid defence of the President, either from the White House or the Republican party. All i see is half-baked conspiracy theories and petty jibes. Worse still if you look at the President's actions and "the transcript" he released it seems to confirm that there was a Quid Pro Quo and that it was done in bad faith to affect the narrative of the 2020 election.
So its been quite evident, to me anyway, the impeachment hearing was fueled by hearsay. But I always thought hearsay isnt admisable in a trial even one held in the senate. I wonder how thats gonna work.
Hearsay (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hearsay_in_United_States_law#Exceptions_to_the_hea rsay_rule) can be admissible in US Law, there are numerous exceptions. Being hearsay evidence in itself does not stop it from being potentially strong evidence or relevant especially when you have multiple witnesses confirming the same incident. If the President was truly confident in his innocence, he wouldn't have blocked his staff from testifying.
Just my analysis as a lawyer though, everyone is entitled to their own opinion in free societies.
Rockstar
12-16-19, 10:19 AM
Oh boy, another lawyer. Since I've never voted in my life and have no political affiliation or hide in a political cave Why do you think there is a need to provide a valid defense of the president, against what? From what I've read has shown everything to be highly political, accusations to be unfounded hearsay, media reports fraud and internal misbehavior of the FBI against a duly elected president. In otherwords I agree with the IG report and professor Johnathan Turly's testimony.
Sure you may not like him, think him unbecoming, a bore, dispise the color of his hair make fun of the size of his hands. IMO that is more akin to political satire and trivial, petty childish behavior. If anything Trump is just like you and everyone else including me (sometimes :)). The best defense we can have against any politician from any party is to become an INFORMED voter. You dont like the current trade policy because TRUMP bad man, allies friends, china to super duper? Those are nothing more than emotional useless reasons, right along their playbook to keep the herd in line by not knowing enough to ask intelligent questions.
FeatsOfStrength
12-16-19, 10:59 AM
Oh boy, another lawyer. Since I've never voted in my life and have no political affiliation or hide in a political cave Why do you think there is a need to provide a valid defense of the president, against what? So far everything I've read has shown accusations to be unfounded hearsay, media reports fraud and internal misbehavior of the FBI against an elected president.
Sure you may not like him, think him unbecoming, a bore, dispise the color of his hair make fun of the size of his hands. IMO that is the trivial, petty childish behavior. If anything Trump is just like you.
Because the office of President in the United States is not equivalent to that of a King. Constitutional processes are there to provide checks and balances against abuse of power. Which is what the President is being accused of. If the White House is incapable of defending itself against the accusations beyond blocking witnesses, personal attacks on representatives involved in the hearings and putting forward conspiracy theories about Ukrainian interference in the elections, it looks to me as though they have no defense.
The President's appearance or personal life is irrelevant, it's his actions as an elected official that are concerning. If abuse of power is not addressed then why even bother having checks and balances at all if they're not checking or balancing anything?
The reference to Plato's cave wasn't aimed at you in particular i was using it to describe what I've seen happen to American politics & society as a whole. I don't know what you've been reading, but if you want to read the documents directly relating to the impeachment hearing and not second hand biased accounts posted on blogs, social media and news sites you can find them here (https://www.justsecurity.org/67076/public-document-clearinghouse-ukraine-impeachment-inquiry/).
Rockstar
12-16-19, 11:29 AM
Dont need a lecture about checks and balances that IMO is a trivial distraction from my question. I asked what does he need to defend against.
Article I Abuse of power
"President Trump solicited the interference of a foreign government, Ukraine, in the 2020 United States Presidential election".
Still no eye witness testimony, only hearsay. Personally I have yet to see or hear of any proof that he solicited information for this reason. It appears to me as does prof, Trurly he's busy defending himself against what Alexander Hamilton warned us about in his Federalist Essays Summary No. 65 March 7, 1788. If you or anyone has even a shred of evidence of wrong doing I would love to hear about it.
Article II Obstruction of congress
"Donald J. Trump has directed the unprecedented, categorical, and indiscriminate defiance of subpoenas issued by the House of Representatives". Sure you may not like it But it is not without precedence it has been done before to quell inquiries. Think back to Dwight Eisenhower and Joe McCarthy.
The IG report and Professor Turly's testimony before congress during the impeachment hearing are not second hand accounts or linked to some obsure website or blog, But thanks anyway.
It made me sad, reading words like
Hearsay seems to be allowed in Senate and in Congress.
Markus
Dont need a lecture about checks and balances that IMO is a trivial distraction from my question. I asked what does he need to defend against.
Article I Abuse of power
"President Trump solicited the interference of a foreign government, Ukraine, in the 2020 United States Presidential election".
Still no eye witness testimony, only hearsay. Personally I have yet to see or hear of any proof that he solicited information for this reason. It appears to me as does prof, Trurly he's busy defending himself against what Alexander Hamilton warned us about in his Federalist Essays Summary No. 65 March 7, 1788. If you or anyone has even a shred of evidence of wrong doing I would love to hear about it.
Article II Obstruction of congress
"Donald J. Trump has directed the unprecedented, categorical, and indiscriminate defiance of subpoenas issued by the House of Representatives". Sure you may not like it But it is not without precedence it has been done before to quell inquiries. Think back to Dwight Eisenhower and Joe McCarthy.
The IG report and Professor Turly's testimony before congress during the impeachment hearing are not second hand accounts or linked to some obsure website or blog, But thanks anyway.
And we don't need a lecture from you either, don't need your permission to post anything we feel strongly about, or your vote or your acceptance of it. Get over your self.
Rockstar
12-16-19, 03:52 PM
Reading comprehension issues again eddie? you sound just like Trump I never said you needed my permission, post anything you like. I just thought the checks and balance lecture was a distraction from my question. All I want to know is there any evidence that has been realized which supports Article I? Sure there was plenty of hearsay.
Can it be presumed Trump called for personal political gain? I suppose it could. But it can also be presumed he called for Ukraine's to look into the corruption and Biden's association with Burisma for national interest. Though Im not naive to think it could not be used for political advantage later on down the road.
If there is evidence to support Article I then bring it forth quit screwing around and remove him from office, you wouldnt hear a peep from me. If not quit the political drama shows and lets get on with more pressing issues.
Skybird
12-16-19, 07:40 PM
The sober, saddening truth.
https://translate.google.de/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.tagesspiegel.de%2Fpolitik%2Fun tersuchungen-gegen-donald-trump-ist-die-ukraine-affaere-das-neue-watergate%2F25323244.html
Like I said repeatedly: the lil' boy in the White House is not the cause but the symptom for an erosive process of hyperpolarization that runs sinces decades and destroys the very constitutkionasl and institutional fundament of political America. From this, America will never recover. History does not suddenly stop and reverse.
Meanwhile lil' boy's own lil boy behaves like a juvenile rowdy on the schoolyard. The apple does not fall far from the tree.
Bilge_Rat
12-17-19, 03:00 PM
So far I haven't seen any valid defence of the President, either from the White House or the Republican party. All i see is half-baked conspiracy theories and petty jibes. Worse still if you look at the President's actions and "the transcript" he released it seems to confirm that there was a Quid Pro Quo and that it was done in bad faith to affect the narrative of the 2020 election.
If you were really a lawyer (and objective) as you claim, you would know the burden of proof is solely on the party pushing impeachment.
POTUS is innocent until proven guilty and does not have to provide any defence until the Dems prove their case.
POTUS was validly elected in 2016, if you are going to remove a duly elected President less than one year before the next election, you need a pretty serious reason.
Here the Dems cannot even prove that: 1) what they say happened even in fact happened (i.e. no factual proof, beyond hearsay and conjectures); and 2) even if we accept that what they say happened did in fact happen, exactly what laws POTUS has violated.
The Dems case is so weak and obviously politically motivated, that the GOP strategy to ridicule and ignore it is the only sensible course of action.
Skybird
12-17-19, 05:59 PM
Institutions and procedures do no longer function as they were once intended when they were designed. And the lil' boy? Simply reflects and reverses all charges against him, accusing the others of what he as done himself. Often seen defence mechanism in psychotherapy, and rhetoric seminars.
state reason has been turned into a boxing bout during the yearly fair. The more obscene the actors, the louder the mob yells and applaudes. Pennies and bottles flying through the air, praise thy champ everybody. The pride of the Western world. The highlight of cultural civilization.
There is no excuse for this. There just is no excuse.
And the hyperpolarization of US politics will continue. These trenches will never turn narrower again.
Narciss making rabid grimaces by the billabong. The story will end like being told. What a relief. What a threat.
If you were really a lawyer (and objective) as you claim, you would know the burden of proof is solely on the party pushing impeachment.
POTUS is innocent until proven guilty and does not have to provide any defence until the Dems prove their case.
POTUS was validly elected in 2016, if you are going to remove a duly elected President less than one year before the next election, you need a pretty serious reason.
Here the Dems cannot even prove that: 1) what they say happened even in fact happened (i.e. no factual proof, beyond hearsay and conjectures); and 2) even if we accept that what they say happened did in fact happen, exactly what laws POTUS has violated.
The Dems case is so weak and obviously politically motivated, that the GOP strategy to ridicule and ignore it is the only sensible course of action.
Its amazing how some people make claims they can't support based on the scantiest of arguments. They seem to be the sort who claim to have read something like War & Peace or Moby Dick after having only read the Cliff Notes of a book. It is somewhat similar to claiming to know the whole Bible based on a knowledge of the Ten Commandments, the Lord's Prayer, and a handful of random Biblical quotes. One thing about lawyers: they tend to actually delve into the facts of a case before making statements on a case and also tend not to deal in overly broad, sweeping statements. I am no lawyer, but I do, at least, make the effort to actually look into the facts presented by all sides before dismissing, out of hand, the opinions presented by others, and, when I do refute someone's claims, I do make the effort to back up my position with verifiable cites, something a great number of Trumpettes seem incapable of achieving. Perhaps it is because there is a dearth of factual, logical, sensible, verifiable defenses for Trump's actions in office; perhaps it is the normal fear of facts and truth to be found in those who know they have no defense...
Interestingly, the only persons in the whole impeachment investigation process who have actually testified under oath and under penalty of perjury are not any of Trump's minions or associates who were involved in the activities in question; one would think, if Trump and themselves were not culpable, they would be clamoring to give sworn testimony; instead, what they do is hide under some dubious claim of privilege above the law and refuse offered opportunities to present their case and/or offer sworn testimony, which is a pity, really, because it would be fun to see them burst into flames while lying under oath... :haha:
I say the Senate should give in to Trump's request for a full trial with witnesses. Let Giuliani take the oath and give one of his famously 'coherent" rants and have him subjected to real cross-examination about te Ukraine matter. let the White House produce all the emails, notes letters, and other documents related for public view and the Senate's evaluation at trial. let those who actually participated in or have relevant knowledge and/or evidence of the related charges openly, and under oath and penalty of perjury, be heard. The GOP Senate leadership's worst fear is the truth and they are fighting mightily to sweep the trash that is Trump under the rug; they may ultimately succeed in terms of the impeachment trial, but one thing is very certain: there is an awful lot of other actionable illegality bearing Trump's fingerprint's still out there and has yet to fully move through the process. Then there is also the fact that Trump is Trump: the probability Trump will do something boneheaded, illegal, or highly detrimental to his tenure and/or his reelection is extremely, extremely high...
As far as:
Here the Dems cannot even prove that: 1) what they say happened even in fact happened (i.e. no factual proof, beyond hearsay and conjectures); and 2) even if we accept that what they say happened did in fact happen, exactly what laws POTUS has violated.
...is concerned, the Judiciary Committee is required, by law, to issue a report to support the charges made in an impeachment resolution and the Committee did so on 13 Dec 2019, in which the supporting evidence is detailed with appropriate reference to applicable law; the filing also includes dissenting views by GOP Committee members. Your claim, as with so many others of yours, is again no supported by the facts. Here is a link to a PDF of the official Judiciary Committee:
https://docs.house.gov/billsthisweek/20191216/CRPT-116hrpt346.pdf
There is plenty in the report to support the charges and it is based on actual sworn testimony and evidence. Sorry to have burst the bubble of "no factual proof, beyond hearsay and conjectures", but facts have a tendency to do so. I post the link with the knowledge that the response will be "TLDR", but you should "R", particularly if you are going to make such broad, sweeping, and inaccurate statements, and wish to have even a semblance of 'objectivity'...
Now, let's see if the GOP Senate will actually hold a real fair trial or, in fear of how the actual truth and facts will cripple their little Party, once again stick their noses firmly up the crack of Trump's ample posterior, and do their version of a kangaroo court...
<O>
Institutions and procedures do no longer function as they were once intended when they were designed. And the lil' boy? Simply reflects and reverses all charges against him, accusing the others of what he as done himself. Often seen defence mechanism in psychotherapy, and rhetoric seminars.
Thing is Skybird the Dems have actually done the same thing, many times, including against this president.
In 2016 the Democratic Party enlisted a foreign national with Russian sources to peddle Russian invented lies about Trump to a willing CIA and FBI as well as leak lurid details to biased media outlets in an attempt to fix the outcome of the upcoming presidential election in favor of their candidate, and when that failed, overturn its results. That is a fact and it is the same exact thing as what they are accusing Trump of trying to do in Ukraine, but the differences here are that they actually did it and Trump did not.
Besides there is the huge disparity factor when comparing a few simple words in a single conversation to a huge conspiracy of embedded partisans using the formidable investigatory resources of several federal government agencies including the use of foreign spies, domestic undercover agents, wire taps, secret (illegally obtained) and search warrants, not to mention still untold millions in taxpayer dollars.
Being a foreigner you may not realize it but the Democrats are the original Gas Lighters in this country and there are numerous examples of this type of dirty tactic going back to at least the Reagan years, long before they began to hate their former pal Donald Trump for the sin of becoming a Republican.
Did not Ted Kennedy, Lion of the Democratic party, attempt to collude with the Russians, the KGB itself apparently, in the 1980 election against President Reagan? Did not a delegation of Democrat Senators write to the President of the Ukraine just last year demanding that the Ukrainians investigate President Trump and subtlety threatening to withhold aid if they didn't play ball? Now if you can stretch Trumps call transcript into a crime by reading between the lines on what you think he "really meant" then a read of the letter that they wrote should be just as damning to you.
Thing is dude you can continue to play the troll from your foreign perch and call Trump all the stupid names you want but I'm betting that Trump is going to survive not only your disdain but also this latest coup attempt and that we voters are going to reelect him to a second term next November unless a better alternative presents itself. So far it hasn't, so you and the rest of the bad orange man haters can just stew in your bile for another 5 years as he continues to deliver prosperity and success for the American people.
I just hope that whoever replaces him in 2025 will meet with similar levels of disapproval. Hate him even more if possible because it will mean that he's continued to deliver on what we elected him to do and that's fine by me.
Looks like Ukrainian corruption is edging closer to Giuliani, and Trump's doorstep...
Giuliani associate Parnas was paid $1 million by fugitive Ukrainian oligarch --
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/giuliani-associate-parnas-was-paid-1-million-by-fugitive-ukrainian-oligarch-2019-12-17
...and here's why the above matters:
Yeah, the Letter. But Today's Biggest Trump News Came Out of a Court Room in New York. --
https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/yeah-letter-todays-biggest-trump-215500896.html
Trump's personal lawyer, who has personal ties to Ukrainian operative under indictment for corruption who, in turn have ties to a Russian-backed Ukrainian oligarch who is in exile from Ukraine because of his involvement in Ukrainian corruption...
Seems like Trump is trying to 'stamp out Ukrainian corruption' by subsuming it into his operations... :haha:
<O>
Buddahaid
12-18-19, 12:38 AM
Institutions and procedures do no longer function as they were once intended when they were designed. And the lil' boy? Simply reflects and reverses all charges against him, accusing the others of what he as done himself. Often seen defence mechanism in psychotherapy, and rhetoric seminars.
state reason has been turned into a boxing bout during the yearly fair. The more obscene the actors, the louder the mob yells and applaudes. Pennies and bottles flying through the air, praise thy champ everybody. The pride of the Western world. The highlight of cultural civilization.
There is no excuse for this. There just is no excuse.
And the hyperpolarization of US politics will continue. These trenches will never turn narrower again.
Narciss making rabid grimaces by the billabong. The story will end like being told. What a relief. What a threat.
The US survived the turbulent sixties and seventies and will survive this.
FeatsOfStrength
12-18-19, 10:59 AM
If you were really a lawyer (and objective) as you claim, you would know the burden of proof is solely on the party pushing impeachment.
POTUS is innocent until proven guilty and does not have to provide any defence until the Dems prove their case.
POTUS was validly elected in 2016, if you are going to remove a duly elected President less than one year before the next election, you need a pretty serious reason.
Here the Dems cannot even prove that: 1) what they say happened even in fact happened (i.e. no factual proof, beyond hearsay and conjectures); and 2) even if we accept that what they say happened did in fact happen, exactly what laws POTUS has violated.
The Dems case is so weak and obviously politically motivated, that the GOP strategy to ridicule and ignore it is the only sensible course of action.
A crime does not need to have been committed to qualify a president's actions as impeachable misconduct, and i'd argue there is legal credibility to the witnesses and the information they have presented (You'll notice I pointed out that there are exceptions to Hearsay that are admissible). I'm hardly an expert on US Constitutional Law though, and I know any opinions I hold are open to change... which is more than can be said for a few of the posters in this thread who seem to be taking this whole thing rather personally.
There's not really any point posting further, taking the time to deconstruct peoples arguments here and attempting to have a discussion reminds me of a dog chasing it's tale. :ping:
Skybird
12-18-19, 11:04 AM
The "turbulent" seventies directly lead to the crisis today, its not two different crisis, its just one. It spend the past decades to fully unfold to its present status. Reminds of the currency cirsis. There they too speak of eve rnew fiance crisis. Its just one.
Demiocrats have begun a battle today that they canot win. Not only have they no chance to win in senate, in fact they now openly agree to play the game by the rules of "Who plays polarization the loudest?" And the master palyre of this game and its rules is not a Demcorats, but its the lil boy in the white House, he excelles in polarizaiton more thn anyone else.
The next presidential elections, by all what can currently be forseen and said, are already won for the Republicans. The Democrats are too weak, to incapable themselves, too left and too reality-denying. Their candiates illustrate that. Lil cesar is not one bit better than any of them. Its just that he can polarise the masses better than any of the Democrats can.
And thus my logical conclusion: everything must and will get worse.
Yes, america will prevail. But it aleady now is a radically different America than it was decades ago, and 20 years ago. Not to see this, actually denying it, is what feeds the bitterness on both sides of the trenches.
Bilge_Rat
12-18-19, 11:08 AM
A crime does not need to have been committed to qualify a president's actions as impeachable misconduct,
True, but what has been clear from the beginning of this administration is that given the Senate seats, POTUS could only be removed if there was bi-partisan support.
It was also clear that Republicans would only vote to remove a Republican President if there was actual evidence that the current President committed a crime. Absent that proof, it is clear that this effort was doomed to failure from the start.
Skybird
12-18-19, 12:36 PM
It was also clear that Republicans would only vote to remove a Republican President if there was actual evidence that the current President committed a crime.
Wrong. The Republican speaker in the Senate was crystal clear on that from beginning on: he said he does not care for evidence and what the truth is, he said, and his party would support Trump NO MATTER WHAT.
Evidence, reason, argument, logic - it all plays no role here. Its no judical procedure, but a political stage show. Evidence, character, integrity - it all plays no role anymore. If you ask the benefitting gang members whether their boss is a sait not a villain and leave the question of whether he gets sent to jail or not to them - then its clear what you get as a verdict.
Morally the cause is just and proven. Yes, the lil' boy should be given the boot. But moral plays no role here. Evidence plays no role here. Its political cage fighting. Anything goes. The lil boy slobbers and balks everyone to death.
We should send the whole political caste to sort of global hunger games. The survivor who wins is allowed to live on in a locked cage made of pure gold.
AVGWarhawk
12-18-19, 03:58 PM
Wrong. The Republican speaker in the Senate was crystal clear on that from beginning on: he said he does not care for evidence and what the truth is, he said, and his party would support Trump NO MATTER WHAT.
Evidence, reason, argument, logic - it all plays no role here. Its no judical procedure, but a political stage show. Evidence, character, integrity - it all plays no role anymore. If you ask the benefitting gang members whether their boss is a sait not a villain and leave the question of whether he gets sent to jail or not to them - then its clear what you get as a verdict.
Morally the cause is just and proven. Yes, the lil' boy should be given the boot. But moral plays no role here. Evidence plays no role here. Its political cage fighting. Anything goes. The lil boy slobbers and balks everyone to death.
We should send the whole political caste to sort of global hunger games. The survivor who wins is allowed to live on in a locked cage made of pure gold.
None of the articles of impeachment should give anyone the boot. Obstructing Congress? Abuse of power? Follow along please:
It seems like every time they dig a little deeper, James the leaker Comey pops up. Pay attention to his lies. He claims he was not involved in the FBI's most important investigation. Which just happened the spying on Trumps campaign. Same guy who refused to prosecute Hillary.
If you think there was no bias at the FBI, do me a favor. Substitute Trump for any other President or Presidential candidate in the text messages between Strock and Page.
Of the 17 errors in the FISA application, were there any mistakes in favor of Trump?
Why didn't the FBI tell the FISA court that the Steele Report was funded by the DNC?
Why didn't they tell the court that Carter Page was working for the CIA? That is why he had contact with Russians.
I know half the country does not like Trump...I get it. Now you know why he didn't trust our own intelligence community. The plants that were left over from the previous administration should have been fired on the first day. They put party over country.
If Hillary was elected as they thought she would be, all of this would never see the light of day. Here we are....
WE ARE BEING LIED TO.
WE ARE BEING LIED TO.No....... Congress would never stoop that low, would they?
u crank
12-18-19, 04:16 PM
Wrong. The Republican speaker in the Senate was crystal clear on that from beginning on: he said he does not care for evidence and what the truth is, he said, and his party would support Trump NO MATTER WHAT.
It may come as a surprise to you but these people are politicians. And impeachment does not take place in a court of law. It takes place in Congress. The people who accuse and defend are not lawyers or judges they are politicians. The people who will decide are not a jury chosen from the public but politicians voted into office. So what you will get as sure as the sunrise is a political outcome.
Impeachment is designed to fail except under the most obvious reasons. This doesn't seem to be one of them. But even if it was people should look at the last impeachment effort for a refresher in political loyalty. Clinton was impeached in the House of Representatives for perjury and the obstruction of justice. At that time there were 45 Democrats in the Senate. They voted 45 to 0 to acquit on both charges. Are you surprised?
AVGWarhawk
12-18-19, 04:29 PM
No....... Congress would never stoop that low, would they?
Lower then whale crap on the ocean floor.
AVGWarhawk
12-18-19, 04:31 PM
It may come as a surprise to you but these people are politicians. And impeachment does not take place in a court of law. It takes place in Congress. The people who accuse and defend are not lawyers or judges they are politicians. The people who will decide are not a jury chosen from the public but politicians voted into office. So what you will get as sure as the sunrise is a political outcome.
Impeachment is designed to fail except under the most obvious reasons. This doesn't seem to be one of them. But even if it was people should look at the last impeachment effort for a refresher in political loyalty. Clinton was impeached in the House of Representatives for perjury and the obstruction of justice. At that time there were 45 Democrats in the Senate. They voted 45 to 0 to acquit on both charges. Are you surprised?
Nope!
However, these clowns have advised they will look to continue to impeach if this one fails. :doh:
Well the FISA court has made a statement on being lied to by the FBI.
In a rare public order Tuesday, the chief judge of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court [FISC] strongly criticized the FBI over its surveillance-application process, giving the bureau until Jan. 10 to come up with solutions, in the wake of findings from Justice Department Inspector General Michael E. Horowitz.
The order, from the court's presiding judge Rosemary M. Collyer, came just a week after the release of Horowitz's withering report about the wiretapping of Carter Page, a former campaign adviser to President Trump.
"The FBI's handling of the Carter Page applications, as portrayed in the [Office of Inspector General] report, was antithetical to the heightened duty of candor described above," Collyer wrote in her four-page order. "The frequency with which representations made by FBI personnel turned out to be unsupported or contradicted by information in their possession, and with which they withheld information detrimental to their case, calls into question whether information contained in other FBI applications is reliable."
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/fisa-court-slams-fbi-over-surveillance-applications-in-rare-public-order
em2nought
12-19-19, 12:06 AM
Yahoo! Four more years! :up:
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/trump-impeachment-inquiry/live-blog/live-updates-house-votes-impeachment-president-trump-n1103576
Jimbuna
12-19-19, 07:06 AM
In all honesty I can only see the impeachment strengthening his position and popularity.
Bilge_Rat
12-19-19, 08:25 AM
Yup, the only thing this will do is energise the base and turn more independents towards re-electing POTUS.
This is further proof, if any was needed, that the Dems in Congress are now just puppets of the looney left. They are so afraid of a primary challenge to their left that they will just blindly do whatever the socialist mob wants, consequences be damned.
The odds of GOP keeping the Presidency and regaining control of the House just went up.
Onkel Neal
12-19-19, 10:11 AM
Of the 17 errors in the FISA application, were there any mistakes in favor of Trump?
Yeah, that's hard to overlook.
AVGWarhawk
12-19-19, 11:19 AM
In all honesty I can only see the impeachment strengthening his position and popularity.
Jim Buna for the win. :Kaleun_Thumbs_Up:
In all honesty I can only see the impeachment strengthening his position and popularity.
They mentioned it on Danish news yesterday, this impeachment could improve his popularity.
When this journalist said this I could not help thinking
Have the Dem. by taking this step-shot them self in their foot ?
Markus
Skybird
12-19-19, 04:20 PM
^ This is why Pelosi was so very very very hesitent for so long time to actually start impeachment. He party had to push her until, she had no other choice. Now she must put a good face on the matter. The Democrats fired a HE round in a cannon with a congested barrel.
The lil' boy in the White House will do what he does better than any other: polarizing even further to secure his victory 2020. In fact he already has started. The Dems imho now have no chance.
This polarization has started already at the Nixon "incident", immediately after that round ended. It was the last time parties were able to reach out to the other, and Republicans actually cared a bit about the evidence. The next round already was the Republican conspiracy with Khomeini to delay the freeing of the hostages so that Carter could not benefit form it and Reagan got elected. And from then on at the latest the degeneration of standards and political culture went into a steeper and steeper dive. The acceleration this descent has reached in the present years, is breathtaking. Techncially, I put the major guilt on the Republicans who played obviously foul again and again, and I fail to see the Democrats having produced such formidable crime cases like Nixon and Iran-Contra and the war of 2003 and - according to socalled conspiracy theories - letting 9/11 happening to get the cause for total surviellance of civil soeity, orhvate people, and under explicit violation of US laws and constitutional rules. But I also think that even without that that confrontation would have turned out to become sharper and sharper simply due to the Democrats turning ever more lefty.
Anthrax or Ebola. America, choose your poison. Thats your precious freedom. Compromise is not possible. If you died of the one thing, you cannot also die a bit of the other. Its fair to say that lil' Cesar has you all exactly where he wants you. Now recommended is a little studying of European history. Where America now is, where it craves to be: absolute polarization, Europe already has been - several times. The results always were excessive, and in no way pleasant for anyone.
edit:
P.S. I do not think impeachment will give the Democrats sufficient PR points amongst voters. And the surveillance state Americans obviously do not care for, nor is war on climate as big an issue as over here. What could grow numbers of voters for Democrats however is the shabby state the health system is in, but the Democrats would need to handle it somewhat realistically. If they try to milk it by making sky-high promises whose financing even for the laziest sleeper is obvious to be unrealistic, they will mess this chance as well. We see across all of Europe that turning ever more left currently does not pay off for left parties (thats why they so desperately try to import migratst everywhere who traditionally tend to vote more left, and to lower age limits because the young also tend to vote more lefty). People increasingly want to know how promises are to be paid for.
I seriously wonder whether there will be a third party raising in the US in the forseeable future. I see this as realistic, although I know that everybody will laugh at me. But here in Europe they laughed about certain potlkical scenarios as well that nobody imagined - and that by now have become reality, and in a very short time. The established two parties in the US, both are burned and dead.
Your comment made me remember what this Danish News channels journalist in USA said earlier today.
From my memory
Since this started back in September, the Dem was hopping Republican voters would change side and come over to their side. The lastest polls in USA show no real changes on that matter.
Markus
Cybermat47
12-19-19, 07:14 PM
So this whole impeachment thing has just weakened the Democrats and probably left Trump in power due to Republican control of the Senate?
Have the Democrats always been this incompetent?
With the US centre-right party shooting itself in the foot like this, and the Australian centre-right party letting Chinese communists infiltrate it while the country is on fire, it’s no wonder people are drifting further to the political extremes.
Jimbuna
12-19-19, 07:52 PM
Have the Democrats always been this incompetent?
Beginning to look that way.
There's at least one Christian who has seen the hypocrisy of evangelical support for Trump and is speaking out; the fact he is Mark Galli, the editor-in-chief of the Billy Graham-founded Christian magazine Christianity Today and his words, and opiniions, carry an awful lot of weight:
Trump Should Be Removed from Office --
https://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2019/december-web-only/trump-should-be-removed-from-office.html
<O>
With the US centre-right party shooting itself in the foot like this,
You mean center left?
You mean center left?If you go by media reports, there is no center anything, it's either far-left or far right, depending on which alphabet channel you watch, and you can thank the 535 clowns in Washington D.C. for that.
Kptlt. Neuerburg
12-19-19, 11:36 PM
If you go by media reports, there is no center anything, it's either far-left or far right, depending on which alphabet channel you watch, and you can thank the 535 clowns in Washington D.C. for that. And one would think that with the history of far right or leftist politics that no good could or would come of it, but it seems people can't, won't or just don't want to learn.
Skybird
12-20-19, 01:44 AM
There's at least one Christian who has seen the hypocrisy of evangelical support for Trump and is speaking out; the fact he is Mark Galli, the editor-in-chief of the Billy Graham-founded Christian magazine Christianity Today and his words, and opiniions, carry an awful lot of weight:
Trump Should Be Removed from Office --
https://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2019/december-web-only/trump-should-be-removed-from-office.html
<O>
Wowh, that is a plain, straight, devastating full broadside, put in concise and elegant wording. Unfortunately it will get just yelled down by this immoral barbary. Its too subtle and too differentiated as if it could play a role in a bar brawl where the beer bottles are flying and lies are being proudly yelled out into the world to which one has declared a war on facts.
Skybird
12-20-19, 06:03 AM
https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2019/12/16/most-americans-think-their-basic-rights-threatened-new-poll-shows/4385967002/
https://www.statista.com/chart/20310/freedom-us-adults-threatened/
AVGWarhawk
12-20-19, 11:49 AM
^
The lil' boy in the White House will do what he does better than any other: polarizing even further to secure his victory 2020. In fact he already has started. The Dems imho now have no chance.
Trump never stopped polarizing.
Have the Democrats always been this incompetent?
Yes.
There's at least one Christian who has seen the hypocrisy of evangelical support for Trump and is speaking out; the fact he is Mark Galli, the editor-in-chief of the Billy Graham-founded Christian magazine Christianity Today and his words, and opiniions, carry an awful lot of weight:
Trump Should Be Removed from Office --
https://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2019/december-web-only/trump-should-be-removed-from-office.html
<O>
Not all will fall into place from his opinion. In fact, many could walk due to his opinion.
...
Not all will fall into place from his opinion. In fact, many could walk due to his opinion.
Perhaps not all; but all that is needed is enough to tip the scales...
Remember, Trump was able to get his Electoral College win by a razor slim <80,000 poplar votes in just a few key battlefield states, some of which states have shown, in the 2018 midterms and it various other local state elections since 2016, a strengthening tendency to rebuke Trump and the GOP. I have noticed how very often the minions and the Trumpettes and the FR news media such as Fox News will often couch the news of Trump/GOP setbacks with phrases such as 'Well, Trump carried that state/district/legislature in 2016...'; well,, in 2106, Trump was running against a very, very poor DEM candidate (who, in spite of being such a bad candidate, still managed to get over 2,868,000 more votes than Trump) and benefited from the situation; but, that was 2016 and the times they've been a-changing; aside from the whopping whipping the GOP took in losing the House of Representatives, and other losses of various local and state offices (some of which had been long standing GOP sinecures), the news regarding the prospects for 2020 for the GOP and Trump are not very encouraging; Trump's tariffs have wreaked havoc on the farm states and there is a vert vocal backlash from the farmers against Trump; one farmer in particular has been a very vocal and visible critic against Trump and has actually renounced his membership in the GOP and gone Independent (good for him!) and is considering a campaign against Trump favorite Rep. Jim Jordan; not even the estimated up to USD $30,000,000,000 in taxpayer-funded "Trump Bucks" spent to try and mollify farmers who have suffered very real damage from Trump's tariffs is making the farmers feel any sense of security or hope for recovery from the Trump Effect...
...and lets not forget the coal mining states: since Trump ran in 2016 on the promise of saving the failing coal industry and since his term start, there have been at least 5 major coal industry bankruptcies affecting thousands of miners and other workers; in fact, one of the bankruptcies was a mining firm that had gotten assurances from Trump and his minions of particular support from Trump in the event of future difficulties; in the lead-up of problem indicating the firm might, indeed, have to go bankrupt, the firm made numerous pleas to the White House, but never got an answer; so much for "promises kept"...
While there may not be a wholesale shift by any one segment of Trump's 2016 support, given the fragility of his EC gains, based as it was/is on the popular votes in those key states, there are enough rumblings and outright dissensions to make 80,000 votes disappear in 2020; again, there is no need for a wholesale defection, just enough to negate, say 80,000 votes...
<O>
Rockstar
12-21-19, 02:42 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WE1MMeAgqV8
u crank
12-21-19, 06:35 AM
Kass asks a very relevant question in this article but don't hold your breath waiting for the progressive/left media to correct the record.
https://outline.com/9X7twq
Trump is no angel. He’s a transactional man, a dealmaker, a man of questionable ethics and disposition. And if there is any time journalism is required to cover and challenge him, it is now. But after three years of over-the-top cheerleading for “The Resistance,” and soiling itself in the Russia hoax, does the media have any credibility?
Reporters carried water for now discredited former FBI Director James Comey, and for now discredited U.S. Rep. Adam Schiff, who served as the Democratic Inspector Javert of the impeachment, and many others.
So, who lied and who told the truth? Who spun political news stories that were believed as fact and became talking points for partisan jabbering?
Can the media fact check themselves?
In Washington, journalists attend formal dinners and literally sing and dance in musical skits to amuse the establishment ruling class.
They give themselves awards — including Pulitzer Prizes for reporting the Russia-Trump story — that have not been, as yet, returned.
Interesting article:
How Trump won 2019
President Trump ends 2019 in a better position than when he started. The year began with the swearing in of Nancy Pelosi as speaker of the House. The Mueller probe dragged on. The legislative agenda of Trump's first two years in office had petered out. The Democratic frontrunner, Joe Biden, was beating him by double digits in the polls. A little more than halfway through the year, bond prices signaled recession.
Look where things stand now. Pelosi's decision to impeach Trump already has cost her a seat and stands zero chance of resulting in a Senate conviction. Not only has Mueller shuffled off the stage, but Michael Horowitz's report on FBI malfeasance also raises serious doubts about the credibility of the government and media elites who spent years arguing that Trump and his associates were Russian agents. Mitch McConnell blocks liberal bills from the House while confirming additional conservative judges. Biden is damaged and the problems of his candidacy manifest as he sleepwalks toward his party's nomination. The economy is gangbusters.
Nothing the Democratic majority has done has hurt Trump's approval rating. At this time last year, he stood at 42 percent approval and 52 percent disapproval in the RealClearPolitics average (https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president_trump_job_approval-6179.html) of polls. As I write, the RCP average of Trump's approval rating is 45 percent and disapproval is 52 percent. Trump's numbers are remarkably stable and closely track President Obama's (https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president_trump_vs_president_obama_job_approval.ht ml) at this point in his presidency. Biden began the year with big leads over Trump. Since then his margin has dwindled to 4 percent (https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_biden-6247.html). And that's before Trump drops $1 billion in negative social media on him (or whoever the nominee is) next year.
https://freebeacon.com/columns/how-trump-won-2019/
A little laugh before Christmas
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-50849559
Markus
Rockstar
12-22-19, 08:07 PM
The President is head of the Executive, which carries exclusive power to conduct foreign relations. No other branch of government has this power…. As Executive, the President is the ONLY official authorized to request foreign assistance in a corruption investigation…. Obtaining foreign cooperation in investigations of corruption by a US official is a matter of statecraft/diplomacy, ie, a function of foreign affairs…. CONCLUSION: Trump not only is entirely within his powers to use foreign aid as a means to persuade Zelensky to investigate the Biden affair, I believe he was obligated to do so…. The fact Trump may obtain…political advantage from the investigation is simply irrelevant as a matter of law.
Below is the treaty that the Clinton Administration signed on July 22, 1998, in Kiev, Ukraine. Which allows a president to ask Ukraine for legal assistance on criminal matters.
TREATY BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND UKRAINE ON MUTUAL LEGAL ASSISTANCE IN CRIMINAL MATTERS WITH ANNEX, SIGNED AT KIEV ON JULY 22, 1998, AND WITH AN EXCHANGE OF NOTES SIGNED ON SEPTEMBER 30,1999, WHICH PROVIDES FOR ITS PROVISIONAL APPLICATION
THE WHITE HOUSE, November 10, 1999. To the Senate of the United States:
With a view to receiving the advice and consent of the Senate to ratification, I transmit herewith the Treaty Between the United States of America and Ukraine on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters with Annex, signed at Kiev on July 22, 1998. I transmit also, for the information of the Senate, an exchange of notes which was signed on September 30, 1999, which provides for its provisional application, as well as the report of the Department of State with respect to the Treaty.The Treaty is one of a series of modern mutual legal assistance treaties being negotiated by the United States in order to counter criminal activities more effectively. The Treaty should be an effective tool to assist in the prosecution of a wide variety of crimes, including drug trafficking offenses. The Treaty is self-executing. It provides for a broad range of cooperation in criminal matters. Mutual assistance available under the Treaty includes: taking of testimony or statements of persons; providing documents, records, and articles of evidence; serving documents; locating or identifying per-sons; transferring persons in custody for testimony or other purposes; executing requests for searches and seizures; assisting in proceedings related to restraint, confiscation, forfeiture of assets,restitution, and collection of fines; and any other form of assistance not prohibited by the laws of the requested state. I recommend that the Senate give early and favorable consideration to the Treaty and give its advice and consent to ratification.
WILLIAM J. CLINTON.
https://www.congress.gov/106/cdoc/tdoc16/CDOC-106tdoc16.pdf
.
Now I'm confused.
Have President Trump committed a crime when he asked or forced the Ukrainian President to investigate Biden son ?
Or have he not ?
I know he is accused on two things(forgot the correct word)
Markus
AVGWarhawk
12-23-19, 02:21 PM
Now I'm confused.
Have President Trump committed a crime when he asked or forced the Ukrainian President to investigate Biden son ?
Or have he not ?
I know he is accused on two things(forgot the correct word)
Markus
Abuse of power(which can be construed as anything)
Obstruction of Congress(made up nonsense)
Not a crime.
Rockstar
12-23-19, 03:37 PM
Considering past behavior of politicians it doesn't seem to really matter what party a politician belongs too because in the end, career politicians WILL circle the wagons to protect their own and power. First there are the accusations and threats by one party and now the other party has the power to convict. Not that Trump himself is any angel. But the thought has run through my mind that this whole impeachment ordeal is just charade. These guys are going after him at all angles for a reason. Too put it simply if Trumps wants to keep his name, possessions, and privacy he will have to join the swamp and play their rules. I mean common just look at Obama which proves to me presidents are becoming if not already just a figure head.
http://thepilotspub.org/download/file.php?id=8275
Skybird
12-27-19, 08:56 PM
SEALs speak out against platoon leader Galagher.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-50931195
I gave him the shadow of a doubt. But no more.
I gave him the shadow of a doubt. But no more.
Oooh he's in trouble now! :roll:
Onkel Neal
12-27-19, 10:11 PM
Mayor Pete is making sense, he's attempting to resurrect the ACA mandate in part with his new health-insurance proposal, which would create a public option: basically Medicare for all who want it . . . and a few who don’t. Under his proposal, those who fail to sign up for a qualifying health-insurance plan would automatically be enrolled in the government plan, and they would owe premiums — including retroactive premiums for lapses in coverage.
The grievously misnamed Affordable Care Act was in part an effort to replicate the widely admired Swiss health-care system in the American context. The basic problem with that always has been that Switzerland is full of Swiss people, while the United States is full of maniacs.
The preexisting-conditions mandate, which is popular, creates a free-rider problem (i.e. nobody has any incentive to sign up for health insurance until they are actually sick, and so insurance cannot actually function as insurance), hence the hated individual mandate, the rule that people buy insurance. The Swiss enforce their individual mandate ruthlessly—if you fail to sign up for a plan, then the government signs you up for one and you owe your new insurer back premiums and interest to cover any lapse in coverage. The Swiss achieve practically universal compliance; we repealed our mandate, because we like the benefits but don’t want them to have any strings attached.
Buddahaid
12-28-19, 03:37 AM
The basic problem with that always has been that Switzerland is full of Swiss people, while the United States is full of maniacs.
:har:
I do see the point, and that point is a point of contention as it is a form of socialism falling astride of I got mine, go find yours, attitude.
Skybird
12-28-19, 07:35 AM
Oooh he's in trouble now! :roll:
Save your breath, I am not your problem. Murderous psychopaths in uniform are your problem. A chieftain siding with them and protecting them for his own advantage, and overruling law and justice in favour of them is your problem.
Save your breath, I am not your problem. Murderous psychopaths in uniform are your problem. A chieftain siding with them and protecting them for his own advantage, and overruling law and justice in favour of them is your problem.
Well I don't see a problem with any of the three military pardons the CinC has made, and the Navy Chief you are referring to didn't murder anyone as his Court Martial determined so your criticisms are unfounded, as usual.
Interesting article:
Turns Out, Trump’s ‘Evil’ ICE Raids Benefited American Workers
I & I Editorial Board (https://issuesinsights.com/author/iandieditors/)
December 31, 2019
Remember when Democrats reflexively accused President Donald Trump of being a racist when he said illegal immigrants steal American jobs? Turns out, he was right, as evidenced by the aftermath of the massive summer raid that rounded up hundreds of illegals working at chicken processing plants in Mississippi. In early August, some 600 Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents surrounded seven plants operated by five companies in six different cities. They rounded up 680 “undocumented” immigrants, in what was described as the largest raid in a single state.
This is part of a larger effort by Trump to target companies that knowingly hire illegal immigrants. Last year, it raided a landscaping company near Toledo, Ohio, and a meatpacking plant in eastern Tennessee. A Government Accountability Office report issued in early December found that arrests, detentions, and removals were all up in Trump’s first two years in office compared with Obama’s last two.
Nevertheless, the reaction to the Mississippi raid from Democrats was swift and furious. Joe Biden said the raid was a sign that “Trump is morally unfit to lead this country.” Sen. Bernie Sanders called it “evil.” Beto O’Rourke – who dropped out of the race two months after the raid – said Trump’s “cruelty knows no bounds.” The media, naturally, lent Democrats a hand by playing up the disruption and crying children, while playing down the fact that those workers were in the country illegally.
In fact, the raid was the furthest thing from cruel or evil or immoral to American citizens living in the area – many of them black people – who flocked to get the jobs those illegals had held.
This week, the New York Times, to its credit, went to Morton, Mississippi – where a third of the illegals rounded up in those raids had worked – to see what’s become of the town months after Trump’s “evil” act.
And in a shocking display of honest reporting, the Times shows how American workers – particularly black people – benefited as a result.
https://issuesinsights.com/2019/12/31/turns-out-trumps-evil-ice-raids-benefited-american-workers/
I have Clinton network since yesterday and ny watching some of the USA-Middle east relation news and NK-USA related news I can't help thinking.
Do Iran and NK think USA is week just because there are some domestic political problem and Trump may face an impeachment ?
USA may be weak diplomatic I doubt they are week military.
Markus
Buddahaid
01-02-20, 05:15 PM
Trump is impeached. That part is over with.
Kptlt. Neuerburg
01-02-20, 10:52 PM
Wait a minute... I thought that the articles of impeachment where passed but Trump still has to go through the Senate trial before he is impeached or am I mistaken?
And meanwhile the USAF did a thing that might have severe repercussions.
Washington Post
BAGHDAD — The United States killed a powerful commander of Iran’s Revolutionary Guards Corps, Maj. Gen. Qassim Suleimani, in a strike on the Baghdad International Airport early Friday, the Pentagon said.General Suleimani’s death was confirmed by official Iranian media.
“General Suleimani was actively developing plans to attack American diplomats and service members in Iraq and throughout the region,” the Pentagon said in a statement. “General Suleimani and his Quds Force were responsible for the deaths of hundreds of American and coalition service members and the wounding of thousands more.”
This strike was aimed at deterring future Iranian attack plans,” the statement added. “The United States will continue to take all necessary action to protect our people and our interests wherever they are around the world.”
The strikes followed a warning on Thursday afternoon from Defense Secretary Mark T. Esper, who said the United States military would pre-emptively strike Iranian-backed forces in Iraq and Syria if there were signs the paramilitary groups were planning more attacks against American bases and personnel in the region.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/top-iranian-general-qassim-suleimani-is-killed-in-us-strike/ar-BBYz0Zs?li=BBnb7Kz
Going to be a mess in the Middle East now. Of course its always a mess over there, but its going to get much worse.
ikalugin
01-03-20, 06:04 AM
Trump is impeached. That part is over with.
Were the articles delivered to Senate yet?
Torvald Von Mansee
01-07-20, 12:00 AM
Oooh he's in trouble now! :roll:
Well, he IS going to Hell, so there's that..
Onkel Neal
01-07-20, 12:18 AM
Were the articles delivered to Senate yet?
No, not yet.
Aktungbby
01-07-20, 02:38 AM
Nah; so far all the Democrat parlimentary harrassment leads to boring smoke and 'quid pro quo' does not add up to the necessary 'high crime and misdemeanor'. Like previous impeachees, Andrew Johnson and Clinton, the motion will fail to carry...Moreover, cooler heads will prevail; does anyone really want VP Pence to take over!!??
AND A POOR IMPEACMENT IT IS; PELOSI IS NOW HOVERING, DELAYING; AND SHE KNOW IT'S ULTIMATELY A 'NO GO'...The Senate Knows Enough to Acquit Trump. Give Nancy Pelosi this: She has chutzpah. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell responded Friday on the Senate floor to the House’s refusal to appoint managers and transmit its articles of impeachment against President Trump to the upper chamber. “For now,” Mr. McConnell said, “we are content to continue the ordinary business of the Senate while House Democrats continue to flounder. For now.”
Mrs. Pelosi’s response: “The GOP Senate must immediately proceed in a manner worthy of the Constitution.” Never mind that the hold-up is at her end.
Yet now that Mr. Trump has been impeached, the Senate is constitutionally obliged to address the matter. Neither Mrs. Pelosi’s intransigence nor Senate rules, dating from 1868, that peg the commencement of an impeachment trial to the House’s appointment of impeachment “managers” justify an indefinite delay.
As Mr. McConnell noted, the Constitution’s Framers emphasized the importance of a speedy trial in cases of impeachment. “The procrastinated determination of the charges,” Alexander Hamilton wrote in Federalist No. 65, would do “injury to the innocent,” work to “the advantage of the guilty,” and sometimes do “detriment to the state, from the prolonged inaction of men whose firm and faithful execution of their duty might have exposed them to the persecution of an intemperate or designing majority in the House.”
Mrs. Pelosi is holding the impeachment articles hostage, she says, to ensure that the Senate holds what she regards as a “fair” trial. Her central demand is that the Senate permit House managers to call witnesses the House didn’t hear from before impeaching the president. Putting aside the rank hypocrisy of this demand, the Constitution provides that “the Senate shall have the sole power to try all impeachments.” The House has no say in how the trial is conducted.
Mr. McConnell appears to believe it is to his advantage to let Mrs. Pelosi fumble about “for now.” But the Constitution obliges the Senate to act at some point. If the House does not relent, the Senate has two options. It could take the position that because the House bears the normal prosecutorial burden of production and persuasion, Mrs. Pelosi’s refusal to engage with the Senate requires the summary dismissal of the articles. Alternatively, the Senate could take a page from the judiciary’s handbook and appoint outside counsel as managers to make the House’s case against Mr. Trump.
If managers are appointed by either the House or the Senate, the Senate should not conduct a trial on the facts. Instead it should dismiss the articles as a matter of law. The House has alleged no impeachable offense, and therefore no evidence can convict Mr. Trump.
The first article charges the president with “abuse of power” in his dealings with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. There are two ways (https://www.wsj.com/articles/this-impeachment-subverts-the-constitution-11572040762?mod=article_inline) a president can abuse power: by doing something that exceeds his constitutional authority (such as unilaterally imposing a tax) or by failing to carry out a constitutional obligation (refusing to enforce a law). Neither is applicable here.
Mr. Trump had ample constitutional authority to ask Mr. Zelensky to investigate Ukrainian involvement in the alleged Democratic National Committee server hack, the related genesis of the Russia collusion narrative, and Joe and Hunter Biden’s potentially corrupt dealings in Ukraine. The Supreme Court stated in U.S. v. Curtiss-Wright Export Corp. (1936) that the president is the “sole organ of the federal government in the field of international relations,” with exclusive authority to conduct diplomatic relations.
House Democrats don’t dispute this, or claim Mr. Trump’s actions were illegal in themselves. Rather, they allege that he had “corrupt motives” for doing them.
The “corrupt motives” theory is inherently corrosive of democracy. Motives are often mixed, difficult to discern and, like beauty, generally in the eyes of the beholder—which in this case sees through partisan lenses. To Democrats, the transcript of the Trump-Zelensky call demonstrate the desire to harm Democrats; to Republicans, a desire to root out corruption.
Any investigation involving governmental malfeasance can damage the president’s political rivals or benefit allies. But the president has a constitutional duty to “take care that the laws be faithfully executed,” even if his political opponents may be violating them. To bar investigations of the president’s political opponents would effectively hand them a get-out-of-jail-free card and traduce the rule of law. And virtually everything elected officials do serves political ends. If a president’s pursuit of his political interests is impeachable, every president is removable at Congress’s whim.
The House Democrats’ theory will encourage impeachment whenever a President exercises his constitutional authority in a manner offensive to the party controlling the House. The Framers vehemently opposed impeachment for policy disagreements, as legal scholar Michael Gerhardt noted during President Clinton’s impeachment inquiry in 1998. He told the House Judiciary Committee that “one of the most often repeated pronouncements of the framers” was “that impeachment is not designed to address policy differences or opinion.” He referred the committee an “excellent study” by Peter Hoffer and N.E.H. Hull, which warned that “impeachable offenses are not simply political acts obnoxious to the government’s ruling faction.”
The second impeachment article charges Mr. Trump with “obstruction of Congress” for asserting executive privilege in response to subpoenas. But impeachment doesn’t abolish the separation of powers The president has ample constitutional basis to resist congressional demands of documentary and testimonial evidence, particularly when it involves his White House advisers and sensitive national-security issues. This article is not only legally baseless but outrageous, since the House didn’t bother asking a judge to compel White House aides to testify. Instead, Mrs. Pelosi insists Mr. McConnell make it happen. The Senate must stop the madness. If the House chooses not to pursue its case, the Senate has the authority and the duty to move forward and acquit the president without hearing additional evidence. Both with respect to the timing of the impeachment trial and the actual trial procedures, the Senate must fulfill its constitutional duty as the ultimate check on the House majority’s partisan passions and abuse of its impeachment power. George Washington is said to have told Jefferson that the framers had created the Senate to "cool" House legislation just as a saucer was used to cool hot tea. MR TRUMP IS NOT A PRETTY MAN TO BEHOLD IN OR OUT OF OFFICE BUT HE'S NOT WORTH THE FUSS TO IMPEACH AND THE SENATE WILL 'COOL' MADAME SPEAKER'S 'HOT' AGENDA.
Bilge_Rat
01-07-20, 11:32 AM
Ok, so first polling results coming out on Solemeini extermination. USA today/HuffPost poll.
Of those that have an opinion:
53% of all adult americans approve
90% of Republicans approve
57% of independents approve
and of course, 83% of democrats disapprove
So neutral/positive for POTUS and neutral/negative for Biden and co.
Skybird
01-09-20, 06:32 PM
54% of Americans approve of President Trump receiving the death penalty, but believe his transgressions have not risen to a level that warrants removal from office.[...] “Of that 54%, approximately two-thirds said that after he is put to death—preferably by hanging, beheading, or crucifixion—Trump should not only remain in the Oval Office but also be permitted to appear at public events, attend official White House functions, and have a seat at global summits like the G7.
LINK (https://politics.theonion.com/poll-finds-54-of-americans-approve-executing-trump-but-1840514848)
:rolleyes: @ skybird. Try Again.
Skybird
01-09-20, 08:59 PM
:rolleyes: @ skybird. Try Again.
LINK (https://politics.theonion.com/full-trump-transcript-includes-37-pages-of-confused-pre-1839894483)
President Trump responded to Zelensky’s appeals for further cooperation between the two countries by hitting nine and then star 30 times in a row while yelling ‘Ukraine!’ into the phone. This was reportedly followed by an eight-minute exchange where the president repeatedly held down the entire keypad in an attempt to hang up the phone. [...] Legal analysts going over the call were expressing the most interest in the final five minutes, where President Trump attempts to order a meat lovers pizza and cinnamon sticks from Domino’s before launching into a six-minute diatribe about how someone with President Zelensky’s thick accent shouldn’t be working at a pizza place.Meanwhile LINK evangelical magazine calls for removing Trump from holy trinity. (https://politics.theonion.com/prominent-evangelical-magazine-calls-for-removing-trump-1840559882)
“While it is not a decision we undertake lightly, our position is firm: If we do not reverse course now—if we continue to accept Mr. Trump as our Lord and Savior in spite of his blackened moral record—who will take the evangelical community seriously in the years to come?”
Mr Quatro
01-09-20, 10:19 PM
In case you didn't know the State of the Union address is
three weeks from next Tuesday two (2) days after the Super Bowl
2020 State of the Union Address - Wikipedia
The 2020 State of the Union Address is scheduled to be given by the 45th President of the United States,
Donald Trump, on February 4, 2020, in the chamber of the United States House of Representatives at the
United States Capitol in Washington, D.C.
Date: February 4, 2020
Type: State of the Union Address
Location: Washington, D.C.
Venue: House Chamber, United States Capitol
:rolleyes::rolleyes:. Got any original inanities?
Skybird
01-10-20, 11:03 AM
Well, how about reality turning more absurd than satire:
(https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-51063149)LINK - Trump says somebody else got his Nobel peace prize. (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-51063149)
And no, this is not from The Onion. This is BBC World. This is real.
-----
However, The Onion still knows how to do it: LINK (https://politics.theonion.com/republicans-demand-whistleblower-reveal-their-identity-1839668404)
Do you have a cogent point? Or is this another TDS flareup?
Not sure why Trump would want the award or even be recognized by the Nobel committee. The peace prize became a third rate award when they awarded it to a terrorist back in the 90's.
Buddahaid
01-10-20, 09:06 PM
It another feather for his ego scaffolding, you know, vanity? Plus he can play the victim up to his crowd knowing they'll eat it up. Show business.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MIHY7_iatbs
Onkel Neal
01-15-20, 07:52 PM
Impeachment underway again!
Pelosi says Here, Celebrate! Have a pen!
https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2020/01/15/pelosi-signing-impeachment-articles-pens-tsr-vpx.cnn/video/playlists/this-week-in-politics/
Catfish
01-16-20, 03:49 AM
"Trump walking fine line in supporting Iran protesters"
ok, that was it for the protesters, iranian government in full charge again.
Do not interfere you §$%&/U(I)!! :dead:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-iran-crash-trump/trump-walking-fine-line-in-supporting-iran-protesters-idUSKBN1ZF0ET
Skybird
01-16-20, 06:12 AM
Impeachment underway again!
Pelosi says Here, Celebrate! Have a pen!
https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2020/01/15/pelosi-signing-impeachment-articles-pens-tsr-vpx.cnn/video/playlists/this-week-in-politics/
The whole mechanism is a politicla brimborium with polticianspolishign their corrupt egos. Turn it into a legal courtcase with judges having the say. Then the lil' boy would be toast.
The whole impeachment mechanism is designed to be a dysfunctional showact only. Ridiculous. Here in Europe many still seem to take it serious. But when such a procedure is not decided on grounds of evidence and guilt proven, but on grounds of political majorities and party loyalties to the death, then it is simply ridiculous and meaningless.
u crank
01-16-20, 07:15 AM
The whole mechanism is a politicla brimborium with polticianspolishign their corrupt egos. Turn it into a legal courtcase with judges having the say. Then the lil' boy would be toast.
The impeachment process is a political one and rightly so. If it were solely a legal one handled by the courts then no president and I mean NO president would escape endless court challenges to his administration. It would be an unworkable system.
When the Speaker of the House gives out souvenir pens you know the whole thing is a joke.
Skybird
01-16-20, 07:25 AM
You could defend a murderer staying in office with that flawed logic ^.
Even leading personell must be counterchecked and monitored. Your system makes itr an issue of party loyalty and corrupt gang bulding whether or not a corrupt leader gets held accountable. What you have this way, is not a president, but an emperor.
You also allow the maximum of time being given to the offender to maximise the overall damages he causes by his ignorrance of laws and rules. I think it is wiser to interrupt him, to prevent him from keeping to do what he is doing when breaking laws, and to prevent damages getting maximised.
An offender is an offender, and if there is evidence that he is, he must be removed for powers - and must be remived NOW, not just at the end of the legislation term, and only if the voter agrees. An offender is an offender. A state leader shall nbot be allwoed to stand above the law. He should in fact setting an exmaple in following the laws.
It seems to me that Western election frequntly just spill the foulest dirt to the top of the hierachy, everyhwere. The liars, the cheaters, the psychopaths, tthe fraudsters, the criminals, the corrupt, the narcissists, the self-servants.
u crank
01-16-20, 09:42 AM
You could defend a murderer staying in office with that flawed logic ^.
How so? Your lack of understanding about the American system is what has you saying things that make no sense. In that system you have the executive, congress and the judicial branches. If two of those branches, congress and the judicial branch were to work together there would be a much stronger case to remove the president from office. It didn't work against Clinton but it did against Nixon. Once the Supreme court ordered Nixon to turn over evidence he had refuse to, Nixon resigned.
So the question here is why the Democrats in Congress not persuing this path? Two of many possibilities. One is that they know that the evidence and witnesses they are seeking won't move the needle. The other is time. They don't have it. One could almost surmise that Nancy Pelosi is a Joe Biden supporter. While Biden will be campaigning in Iowa, Senators Warren and Sanders will be sitting in the Senate chamber. These people are their own worst enemies.
So criticize 'little boy' all you like. I'm not a fan. But you really should be paying attention to what his political opponents are doing.
I have always said if Trump have violated some law, then prosecute him.
I also have to say I have the feeling that it's more a political vengeance against Trump from the Dem.
Yesterday I read on Danish News page that 6 or 7 of the judge commission(can't remember exact word) are Dem all of them.
This made me feel it is already given, what the outcome will be...this made me sad.
Markus
Skybird
01-16-20, 10:31 AM
I absolutely understand it, and I see through it. You celebrate a holy mass that has nothing holy in it. You are too easily believing claimed stuff and think because something is written down a long time ago, things are like it says. I never was anti-American by the old idea of it, quite the opposite. But the existing reality of it more and more makes me an anti-American regarding the America that is. The difference between the idea and the reality - has become ever wider in the past ten, fifteeen, twenty years. You anbd me maybe cna agree on how it historivclaly wa smeant. But on the present state of things we cannot. And I do not think this trend will chnage over my lifetime. Indeed I think the trend will never reverse again, and the US will become more and more tyrannical.
You are too self-convinced, as a citgizen of the US I mean. But from outside your country's borders it is easier to see that this is no longer justified, since your supremacy does not base on justice or better moral example anymore, but bases on simple brute force. Thats all.
Sorry, but after the past years, the world has fundamentally changed its view of you again. You cannot seriously expect others do still think high of the US after the past years. Or maybe you can do, while others expect that for themselves as well: China, the EU, Russia. And you know how I think about the EU. Why should I think better of the US...???
The global post-WWII order is over. Its dead. NATO cannot be trusted to serve its original founding intention anymore. As far as I am concerned, I do not see the US as an ally anymore, nor a friend. Its an economic foe, and a political rival and foe. Nothing else than this. Major share of the credit for this is to be given to Trump, but not him alone, he is not the cause, but was made possible as a symptom by a longer lasting degenerative, corrosive process in the decades before.
"Nations have no friends. Nations have interests." (Jack Kornblum). And since half or full a year or so I indeed increasingly think that the changes in America forces us to orient ourselves closer towards the East indeed. That is the fruit of the seeds Trump has sown, and already Obama before him, but Trump really let go in sowing: loose all your friends, find plenty of new enemies. Enjoy. Soon it will be no longer your choice to opt for isolationism or not, but you will have no other choice than to accept it, since you have alienated all others. We will not do too well by appoeasing Russia and especialla China, and then Islam. But the US has plotted a course where it does not set itself apart as an alternative. Indeed nobody does spy on us as aggressively and invasively, as the US. A friend we cannot see in you anymore.
Skybird
01-16-20, 10:34 AM
I have always said if Trump have violated some law, then prosecute him.
I also have to say I have the feeling that it's more a political vengeance against Trump from the Dem.
Yesterday I read on Danish News page that 6 or 7 of the judge commission(can't remember exact word) are Dem all of them.
This made me feel it is already given, what the outcome will be...this made me sad.
Markus
Impeachment process is no legal prosecution. Its a show. The accused one's men count against the other side's men. The bigger number wins. Arguments, evidence: irrelevant. Neutral instance deicding on the evidnce: non.-existent. No court. No judge.
Its not meant to work.
Show. Like Wrestling. Its not real.
u crank
01-16-20, 11:56 AM
And I do not think this trend will chnage over my lifetime. Indeed I think the trend will never reverse again, and the US will become more and more tyrannical.
I don't see it. Not much has changed. Is Trump more tyrannical than Obama? I could easily make good arguments to support either claim. I'm 69 years old and I don't see a whole lot of difference in any administration in my lifetime. The biggest change that I notice today is the hyper partisan nature of politics. That I blame on the advent of social media. Thirty years ago if a polititian wanted to say something he had to find a reporter and a TV camera. Today he picks up his phone. People say stupid things.
You are too self-convinced, as a citgizen of the US I mean.
Once again Skybird I will remind you. I am not now nor have I ever been an American citizen. But I do like to follow American politics. It's the big league.
Neutral instance deicding on the evidnce: non.-existent. No court. No judge.
And there is the problem with an impeachment that is based not solely on criminal chargres but also on political crimes. In the US judges are political appointees. What guarantee can you give that they would act in an impartial manner? The framers of the constitution set the impeachment bar very high for just that reason. If the Democrats can make a case that Trump has committed actual crimes rather that political crimes then public opinion and political support will turn against him. That is what happened to Richard Nixon. But the charges against Trump, abuse of power, obstruction of Congress could easily be leveled against Pelosi and Schiff. It is not a very strong case and will almost certainly fail to remove Trump from office.
Its not meant to work.
It is meant to work in the political arena and and yes it is mostly show. The creepy video of Democrats walking the impeachment articles over to the Senate that resembles some kind of religious ceremony is proof of that.
Watchdog: White House violated law in freezing Ukraine aid
https://apnews.com/9127109f325778490fd40c5f98be1817
The Government Accountability Office said in a report that the Office of Management and Budget violated the law in holding up the aid, which Congress passed less than a year ago, saying “the President is not vested with the power to ignore or amend any such duly enacted law.”
[..]
The independent agency, which reports to Congress, said OMB violated the Impoundment Control Act in delaying the security assistance Congress authorized for Ukraine for “policy reasons,” rather than technical budgetary needs.
“Faithful execution of the law does not permit the President to substitute his own policy priorities for those that Congress has enacted into law,” wrote the agency’s general counsel, Thomas Armstrong, in the report.
Jeff-Groves
01-16-20, 12:24 PM
I'm gonna say this.
Since WHEN does putting one letter at a time on a document become a signature?
And who exactly paid for all those pens and what did each one cost?
I think we need an investigation into all that crap!
Actually surprised they didn't change a shoe at each step as those shoes are now history right?
Totally expect the freaking under pants they wore to go up for sale on E-Bay soon!
Poop stains and all!
Nothing but a big show that Mr. Barnum would have been proud of!
Mr Quatro
01-16-20, 01:30 PM
I'm gonna say this.
Since WHEN does putting one letter at a time on a document become a signature?
And who exactly paid for all those pens and what did each one cost?
I think we need an investigation into all that crap!
Actually surprised they didn't change a shoe at each step as those shoes are now history right?
Totally expect the freaking under pants they wore to go up for sale on E-Bay soon!
Poop stains and all!
Nothing but a big show that Mr. Barnum would have been proud of!
:haha::up:
That's funny Jeff unless it really happens ... What I find ironic is that the
Democrats actually think that the GOP is going to go along with them by turning over the WH to VP Pence and then even go so far to think that Biden could win in the National 2020 election. :o
The odds are against them and always have been ... This whole thing has been just for show to the uneducated voters. :yep:
Is it more than "funny" to see the production of Trump's China trade deal. It has not solved one real issue only those which were introduced by Trump himself. The same is true for North Korea and other conflicts.
But yeah that is the politics of populists....simple "solutions" for complex issues...
Jeff-Groves
01-16-20, 01:40 PM
:haha::up:
That's funny Jeff unless it really happens ... What I find ironic is that the
Democrats actually think that the GOP is going to go along with them by turning over the WH to VP Pence and then even go so far to think that Biden could win in the National 2020 election. :o
The odds are against them and always have been ... This whole thing has been just for show to the uneducated voters. :yep:
I also thought it was against the Law for any Member of Congress to accept a gift?
In giving away those Pens did not that become a violation of Laws?
A bribe of sorts?
Aktungbby
01-16-20, 03:34 PM
This whole thing has been just for show to the uneducated voters. :yep:...otherwise known as peasants!:O:
Jeff-Groves
01-16-20, 04:53 PM
...otherwise known as peasants!:O:
Were they not referred to as "Undesirables" at one time?
Oh. Yeah! We must be politically correct when the situation calls for it.
I'm not great at that PC stuff but still want to know who paid for all the G-D Pens!
N A N C Y P E L O S I E
That's 12 pens done twice! So 24 freaking pens!
Given Government procurement? I'm thinking at lest $1000 each!
That's $24,000
Buddahaid
01-16-20, 05:33 PM
And your pen point is?
https://youtu.be/2KX9pwIruP4
Jeff-Groves
01-16-20, 05:39 PM
Don't get what your point is.
I noticed the Duck did do a legal signature.
Did the Nanc? Accept a pen? Could be bribery right there.
I ain't no Lawyer. I have to much self respect to go that deep into the Devils pocket.
Jeff-Groves
01-16-20, 05:57 PM
Basic research says each of those pens may be as cheap as $50 each.
I doubt those were the standard $50 dollar pens!
So at 50 times 24? That's around $1200 bucks!
12 bic pens at Dollar Tree is $1 buck!
So who is paying for those pens?
Seeing the fact each of the passed away pens are now historic?
Value is WAY Above cost! Therefore can be looked at as a bribe.
Probably need to start a movement to look into this 'secret bribery ring'
Would give the FBI something almost real to do.
Signing the document to send an impeachment to the senate for a sitting President is an historic occasion.
There are bigger things to worry about besides pens. :up:
Jeff-Groves
01-16-20, 06:19 PM
Signing the document to send an impeachment to the senate for a sitting President is an historic occasion.
There are bigger things to worry about besides pens. :up:
Ever heard about symptoms of a disease?
So We blow off $1200+ on pens. Big deal!
Do that THOUSANDS of times!
Maybe hundreds of thousands of times.
The pen is mightier than the sword.
:hmmm:
Buddahaid
01-16-20, 06:26 PM
How dare Nancy use ceremonial pens! I'm just not outraged and demand something I'll think up later.
Skybird
01-16-20, 07:26 PM
Once again Skybird I will remind you. I am not now nor have I ever been an American citizen.
Eh, maybe you are just not trying hard enough?:D
Serious: fair enough, sorry. I constantly forget that you are not, since you sound so very republican American. Think you have told me once or twice before. Try to sound less like an American, then its easier for me to remember. :O:
u crank
01-16-20, 07:43 PM
Eh, maybe you are just not trying hard enough?:D
I don't know what to tell you. Take notes... there will be a test.:O:
I constantly forget that you are not, since you sound so very republican American.
I'm taking that as a compliment. :D
I don't know what to tell you. Take notes... there will be a test.:O:
I'm taking that as a compliment. :D
Well we'd be proud to have you as a citizen.
I'm just not outraged and demand something I'll think up later.
Proud member of the middle-of-the-road moderates at your service. :salute:
We'll figure something out, later. After the game, maybe?? Wait, I'll need to shovel out the driveway. :hmmm:
u crank
01-16-20, 08:15 PM
Well we'd be proud to have you as a citizen.
Jeez another compliment. Keep em coming guys. :haha:
Buddahaid
01-16-20, 08:24 PM
Just don't bring any pens. :arrgh!:
Just don't bring any pens. :arrgh!:
It reminds me of what "don't ask, don't tell" used to mean back in the 1990's.
-As long as you don't relieve me late for your watch, I don't give a #### what your beliefs are. :yeah:
-Don't show me a picture of your wife, girlfriend, or kids unless you expect me to lie out my ###.
"No, that's her in the corner."
"Oh, I thought that was a smudge on the picture.." :o
-or-
"Wow, you must have used a wide-angle lens".
As an example, our gallant CO on the Bremerton decided we needed a "dependent's cruise" because our time in the shipyard wasn't ####ty enough.
So there we are, sailing to Kauai with a load of wives, kids, and the bull#### that entails. I sneak off to berthing to grab some smokes out of my rack and, well, submariners are submariners. :doh: One of my shipmates and his wife decided that if they couldn't hone one off at test depth, well any depth would do. :o
Let's just say that neither of these people were in demand to pose for fashion magazines. :03:
Never mind their feelings, I had to witness that ####. :o
Mr Quatro
01-17-20, 11:25 AM
It reminds me of what "don't ask, don't tell" used to mean back in the 1990's.
-As long as you don't relieve me late for your watch, I don't give a #### what your beliefs are. :yeah:
-Don't show me a picture of your wife, girlfriend, or kids unless you expect me to lie out my ###.
"No, that's her in the corner."
"Oh, I thought that was a smudge on the picture.." :o
-or-
"Wow, you must have used a wide-angle lens".
As an example, our gallant CO on the Bremerton decided we needed a "dependent's cruise" because our time in the shipyard wasn't ####ty enough.
So there we are, sailing to Kauai with a load of wives, kids, and the bull#### that entails. I sneak off to berthing to grab some smokes out of my rack and, well, submariners are submariners. :doh: One of my shipmates and his wife decided that if they couldn't hone one off at test depth, well any depth would do. :o
Let's just say that neither of these people were in demand to pose for fashion magazines. :03:
Never mind their feelings, I had to witness that ####. :o
Great sea story ... :up:
I thought crews quarters was rigged for red all the time :yep:
Start a sea story thread for us wanta bee's :yep:
I thought crews quarters was rigged for red all the time :yep:
No, just most of the time when the ship is underway. Berthing is usually rigged for white when most of the crew is supposed to be awake (manuv. watch, drills, daytime watches and routines in-port, field days :o , etc.). There wasn't really a hard and fast policy (it could also be different ship-to-ship) but rig-for-white was better ("safer") unless some guys were trying to sleep.
This is a pretty good question because I've never really had to pay attention to it. Like I said earlier, there's no hard rule about when to change the lighting in berthing. An interesting variation would be week-end in-port duty days. On Sat and Sun, The CO, XO, COB and most of the crew are not on board.
Berthing could be rigged for red by 9 AM if someone had a tough previous night in town or at home. :O:
Jeff-Groves
01-17-20, 08:59 PM
Just don't bring any pens. :arrgh!:
No Pens!
I'm wondering if the pens were actually made in Mexico.
:hmmm:
:har:
Buddahaid
01-17-20, 10:13 PM
No Pens!
I'm wondering if the pens were actually made in Mexico.
:hmmm:
:har:
I was pretty sure it was China....
I have a law related question.
In some of the movies, series or documentary I have seen where an American court have been a part of this.
Some speaker say something like
State against...name of the accused
Isn't Trump head of the State ?
So what will speaker say when this impeachment start ?
State against Trump ? Or
Markus
Rockstar
01-21-20, 11:44 AM
Im not by any means a legal scholar. But congress represents the people from their districts. Senators represent their whole state.
I'll hazard a guess and say it would be the People vs the President.
Im not by any means a legal scholar. But congress represents the people from their districts. Senators represent their whole state.
I'll hazard a guess and say it would be the People vs the President.
You are right
It's People vs the accused and not state vs accused
Markus.
em2nought
01-21-20, 10:27 PM
Deep state versus the accused. :D
Buddahaid
01-21-20, 11:27 PM
It doesn't look very deep to me, do you need glasses? :arrgh!:
The Senate Republicans voted AGAINST the following:
To subpoena White House documents and records.
To subpoena Department of State documents and records.
To subpoena Office of Management and Budget documents and records.
To subpoena Mulvaney.
To subpoena Department of Defense documents and records.
To subpoena Robert B. Blair
To subpoena Michael P. Duffey.
To subpoena John Robert Bolton.
To provide motions to subpoena witnesses or documents after the question period.
The admission of evidence and classified and confidential materials.
A motion granting the Chief Justice to rule on motions to subpoena witnesses and documents.
u crank
01-22-20, 07:24 AM
The Senate Republicans voted AGAINST the following:
To subpoena White House documents and records.
To subpoena Department of State documents and records.
To subpoena Office of Management and Budget documents and records.
To subpoena Mulvaney.
To subpoena Department of Defense documents and records.
To subpoena Robert B. Blair
To subpoena Michael P. Duffey.
To subpoena John Robert Bolton.
To provide motions to subpoena witnesses or documents after the question period.
The admission of evidence and classified and confidential materials.
A motion granting the Chief Justice to rule on motions to subpoena witnesses and documents.
An obvious question. Why were these subpoenas not issued during the House impeachment proceedings?
Kptlt. Neuerburg
01-22-20, 08:34 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g5QsVeq6cps
An obvious question. Why were these subpoenas not issued during the House impeachment proceedings?Odds are those subpoenas would have been challenged in court and either severely restricted or quashed by a judge. Since the House investigating committee was on a fishing expedition, having those subpoenas quashed by a judge would have weakened their "case" to the point that they would never have been able to pass the impeachment articles on the floor.
If you ignore the politics and focus on the "facts" of this case, this investigation would never have made it past a Grand Jury let alone a probable cause (preliminary) hearing.
u crank
01-22-20, 09:54 AM
Odds are those subpoenas would have been challenged in court and either severely restricted or quashed by a judge.
And of course the same thing would likely happen if the subpoenas were issued by the Senate. And I can't believe that Democrats are dumb enough to not realize that it would go that way. It's a game and Mitch won that round.
Bilge_Rat
01-22-20, 11:24 AM
This has nothing to do with the trial, the acquittal of Trump is a foregone conclusion.
What the Democrats are doing now is forcing GOP senators to take potentially embarassing votes that can be used in attack ads. The Dems goal is to take back control of the Senate, it is a longshot for 2020, but McSally (AZ), Collins (MA) and Gardner (CO) are all vulnerable.
Aktungbby
01-22-20, 01:42 PM
This has nothing to do with the trial, the acquittal of Trump is a foregone conclusion.
https://images.csmonitor.com/csm/2019/10/1091418_1_1028-kangaroo-court_standard.jpg?alias=standard_900x600nc
few weeks ago, U.S. Rep. Steve Scalise, a Republican from Louisiana, gave the impeachment proceedings against President Donald Trump a nickname, using the hashtag #KangarooCourt in a tweet. It’s an evocative phrase, even if you’re not sure what it means, and kangaroo itself is, for English, an unusual word. Kangaroo doesn’t look like many other English words because it comes from the indigenous Australian language Guugu Yimithirr, although it took scholars a long time to accept that. Even now the Oxford English Dictionary doesn’t quite buy it, granting only that kangaroo is “stated to have been the name in an Australian Aboriginal language.”
The doubt arises because British explorers recorded different words for the same animal. In 1770, Captain James Cook landed in northern Australia and wrote down “Kangooroo or Kanguru.” John Hunter mapped land near modern-day Sydney and learned that the word was “patagorong.” Lancelot Threlkeld, a missionary working north of Sydney, heard “mo-a-ne.” Rather than drawing the obvious conclusion, that these are three different words because they come from three different languages, the Oxford English Dictionary prefers to consider the matter unsettled.
Linguists and lexicographers agree, though, that the word’s popular folk etymology is wrong. The story holds that when Cook arrived, he pointed at an animal and asked, “What is this?” His interlocutor responded “kangaroo,” meaning “I don’t understand,” which Cook took to be the animal’s name.
Despite the Australian antecedents of kangaroo, the kangaroo court was originally an American institution. Merriam-Webster defines it as “a mock court” or one “characterized by irresponsible, unauthorized, or irregular status or procedures.” No one knows precisely where the term comes from – it might have originated during the lawless days of the California gold rush, when miners had to create their own court system to adjudicate disputes over claim jumping. Another theory speculates that these courts earned the name “kangaroo” because they “jump to conclusions.”:O: :arrgh!: THE DONALD DOES LOOK A LITTLE...GOO-GOO EYED AT THAT:hmmm: https://i1.wp.com/metro.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/comp-1578595833.png?quality=90&strip=all&zoom=1&resize=644%2C362&ssl=1
Mr Quatro
01-22-20, 02:37 PM
This has nothing to do with the trial, the acquittal of Trump is a foregone conclusion.
What the Democrats are doing now is forcing GOP senators to take potentially embarassing votes that can be used in attack ads. The Dems goal is to take back control of the Senate, it is a longshot for 2020, but McSally (AZ), Collins (MA) and Gardner (CO) are all vulnerable.
I saw this in my news feed this morning ... This reason would cause some concern :yep:
It is quite obvious that the democrats want the Republicans to think like they do ... How stupid is that :o
They must be playing this card game to entice new voters to side with them ... Still eight (8) months left to entice them :D
Have just seen some senates name Adam speaking in the Senat.
I was confused now and then
In the bottom of the screen it was written
Rep. Adam Last name (D)
I have learned that Rep is a shortage for Republican and (D) is shortage for District s/he is coming from.
Secondly I have through our news media and in this thread learned they are strictly party voters
But this Rep. Adam so to say attacked Trump...that's why I was confused now and then.
I thought the Rep in the Senate supported President Trump.
Markus
This has nothing to do with the trial, the acquittal of Trump is a foregone conclusion.
What the Democrats are doing now is forcing GOP senators to take potentially embarassing votes that can be used in attack ads. The Dems goal is to take back control of the Senate, it is a longshot for 2020, but McSally (AZ), Collins (MA) and Gardner (CO) are all vulnerable.
It's Collins of Maine, (ME not MA) but I have to agree with you, it's all about the upcoming election. I believe control of the Senate and the House are tied to the presidential race. At this point both parties ride on their candidates coat tails. If Trump wins in November then the GoP will also do well and vice versa with the Dems and whoever they nominate. Split ticket voters are going to be few and far between and the result could mean a trifecta win for one party.
u crank
01-22-20, 04:07 PM
Have just seen some senates name Adam speaking in the Senat.
I was confused now and then
In the bottom of the screen it was written
Rep. Adam Last name (D)
I have learned that Rep is a shortage for Republican and (D) is shortage for District s/he is coming from.
Secondly I have through our news media and in this thread learned they are strictly party voters
But this Rep. Adam so to say attacked Trump...that's why I was confused now and then.
I thought the Rep in the Senate supported President Trump.
Markus
Rep stands for Representative. He is not a Senator or a Republican. He is the U.S. Representative for California's 28th congressional district and is a Democrat.
^ Thank you for enlighten me.
After I wrote my last comment I came to the conclusion it can't be Republican.
I also remembered it's the Dem who's presenting their case first.
Edit
Additional thoughts on this impeachment
I see this as some kind of dramatisation or if you prefer a farce.
I have never seen or heard of a trial where one side wasn't allowed to present their strongest evidence(Witness)In this case the Prosecutor which is (D).
While the defence(R) will allowed witness who is a benefit for President Trump to witness
They are in majority and I presume they will vote for the party and the benefit of the President.
In a real court every evidence shall be presented from both side-evidence who may tie the accused to the crime and evidence who's a benefit for the accused.
End of Edit
Markus
Rockstar
01-22-20, 06:24 PM
Congress had all the time in the world to present evidence and EYE witnesses accounts during the impeachment hearing, they never did. The articles of impeachment were sent to the Senate anyways.
IMO this has been a highly divisive and politically motivated farce from the get go.
I have never seen or heard of a trial where one side wasn't allowed to present their strongest evidence(Witness)In this case the Prosecutor which is (D).
While the defence(R) will allowed witness who is a benefit for President Trump to witness
What you mean like when the Democrats refused to allow the Republicans to call any witnesses during the Impeachment hearings? You mean that kind of farce?
Buddahaid
01-23-20, 08:23 PM
You mean those witnesses that would just talk about Biden and ignore the subject called Trump?
You mean those witnesses that would just talk about Biden and ignore the subject called Trump?
That only plays if you believe that Biden is immune from any sort of investigation of criminal behavior as long as he's, well he's not actually running against the president yet, just one of the 20 or so Democratic candidates vying for their parties nomination. What was that Pelosi saying nobody is above the law? Guess she actually meant only Republicans.
Buddahaid
01-23-20, 10:38 PM
That only plays if you believe that Biden is immune from any sort of investigation of criminal behavior as long as he's, well he's not actually running against the president yet, just one of the 20 or so Democratic candidates vying for their parties nomination. What was that Pelosi saying nobody is above the law? Guess she actually meant only Republicans.
Agreed. I'm not defending Biden so he may very well have his time, or not, but he is not the President, and what that means is what this is all about. Trump may want to drain the swamp but the swamp has always been there and isn't going away in his lifetime, or mine. It's why we are arguing about it anyway so it must be working or there is no argument, no freedom.
Onkel Neal
01-23-20, 10:56 PM
Well, if the Democrats were not trying to impeach Trump from day 1, maybe I could take this partisan circus seriously, but... this fool was on it from the get-go. (https://www.rollcall.com/news/congress/house-blocks-al-green-articles-impeachment-trump)
https://cdn.images2.rollcall.com/image/b5c8c9ed786b58e4fd2a9330538821aa5aec733105774d29a6 295c7507f71749/author/2019/07/green160_071719.jpg
I'm just waiting for the next attempt once this one goes down in flames. Ukraine can't be the Democrats last shot. Given the way the senate trial is going there's likely to be time afterwards for one more invented scandal before the election and I figure the they must have something teed up. Can't wait to see what it is.
What you mean like when the Democrats refused to allow the Republicans to call any witnesses during the Impeachment hearings? You mean that kind of farce?
If you mean the last impeachment you had in 1999 against Clinton, then I have to say I did not have Internet(did not own a computer) did not have CNN or other international news channel then only Danish and Swedish.
It was very little info I got about that impeachment then.
Today it's different and I do follow this Impeachment against Trump as closely I can.
I must say it is serious accusation the Dem are presenting in their case.
So many thoughts are going around inside my head.
Do they have something to have it in....all those accusation ?
Have they cherry picked what they need to convince some of the Rep ?
It's so to say unfair not to hear both side, so It's going to be interesting to what the defense have to say.
Markus
u crank
01-25-20, 12:30 PM
If you mean the last impeachment you had in 1999 against Clinton, ....
I'm pretty sure Markus that August is referring to Trump's impeachment and specifically to the House impeachment inquiries led by Adam Schiff and Jerrold Nadler.
I'm pretty sure Markus that August is referring to Trump's impeachment and specifically to the House impeachment inquiries led by Adam Schiff and Jerrold Nadler.
Exactly. It is rank hypocrisy for the Democrats to hold what amounted to a kangaroo court in the House then go to the Senate and complain about fairness. They made this impeachment bed and I hope the Turtle sends them to it without their conviction supper.
Then we can get on to the next manufactured scandal. You know they have at least one more of these up their sleeve.
Exactly. It is rank hypocrisy for the Democrats to hold what amounted to a kangaroo court in the House then go to the Senate and complain about fairness. They made this impeachment bed and I hope the Turtle sends them to it without their conviction supper.
Then we can get on to the next manufactured scandal. You know they have at least one more of these up their sleeve.
I must have missed that.. Then they should not point fingers at Rep in the Senate.
Markus
Onkel Neal
01-25-20, 05:08 PM
Haha, only liberals
New York State Governor Mulls Car Helmet Compulsion (https://www.forbes.com/sites/carltonreid/2020/01/23/new-york-state-governor-mulls-car-helmet-compulsion-to-discourage-motoring/amp/)
New York State Governor Andrew Cuomo told a press conference on January 23 that cars were “paralyzing” New York City and that motoring had to be discouraged with measures such as congestion pricing. When one reporter asked him if he would mandate car helmets for motorists—a measure that would likely dampen demand for motoring—he did not laugh off the suggestion. Instead, he called for data on whether the measure could save lives.
https://thumbor.forbes.com/thumbor/711x474/https://specials-images.forbesimg.com/imageserve/5e2a2814a854780006af5dd3/960x0.jpg?fit=scale
Skybird
01-29-20, 02:50 PM
https://edition.cnn.com/2020/01/29/politics/donald-trump-john-bolton-white-house-book/index.html
How foul regimes are alike... Shall we be surprised? Probably not, the stink in the air is intense enough. Why do i think that Boltion plays the game long enough to know what top secret information is - and what not?
Onkel Neal
01-29-20, 05:08 PM
I think Bolton is about to make Trump regret firing him so dismissively ('Let me guess, you want to nuke them all': Trump constantly baiting John Bolton in front of officials, report says). The irony is, if Trump had listened to John Bolton instead of firing him as National Security Advisor last year, we would be at war for sure. Now Bolton is going to give him some payback, and the Dems are so pumped. Satan, are you listening? Anything to get Trump!:haha:
FeatsOfStrength
01-29-20, 05:15 PM
Exactly. It is rank hypocrisy for the Democrats to hold what amounted to a kangaroo court in the House then go to the Senate and complain about fairness. They made this impeachment bed and I hope the Turtle sends them to it without their conviction supper.
Then we can get on to the next manufactured scandal. You know they have at least one more of these up their sleeve.
If it's "manufactured scandal" as you say then why is the President so desperate to stop witnesses testifying.. to the extent that he would put his foot down on the first amendment and censor the release of John Bolton's book?
I wasn't opposed to Trump when he came into office, it was his disgrace at the 2017 Helsinki summit that really brought out his true colours and made me realise that he is in no way shape or form fit for office. It wasn't the media warping his words on this occasion:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2-Xw0_2eMJg
And he exposed his true colors in front of Putin and the whole world. It's what proved to me he is neither a conservative or a republican, he doesn't give a damn about the United States and he is in it for himself.
Everything he is being accused of fits in with his MO of bad decisions and well documented lack of moral fibre. Conservatives should own their mistakes.
If it's "manufactured scandal" as you say then why is the President so desperate to stop witnesses testifying.. to the extent that he would put his foot down on the first amendment and censor the release of John Bolton's book?
From what I understand Boltons book contains classified material, some of it rated Top Secret, and he was just told to remove it before publishing, but because this is about Bad Orange Man that automatically means it just has to be an attack on the first amendment right?
And he exposed his true colors in front of Putin and the whole world. It's what proved to me he is neither a conservative or a republican, he doesn't give a damn about the United States and he is in it for himself.
Well so you say, I feel differently, but what are you going to do, vote for a gun grabbing, deep state, big government Democrat this time or was that what you did in 2016?
Buddahaid
01-29-20, 07:31 PM
....Well so you say, I feel differently, but what are you going to do, vote for a gun grabbing, deep state, big government Democrat this time or was that what you did in 2016?
I can't help but think that if Trump thought being a gun grabbing, deep state, big government candidate would get him elected he'd be right there. It's all about him and always was.
I can't help but think that if Trump thought being a gun grabbing, deep state, big government candidate would get him elected he'd be right there. It's all about him and always was.
Well narcissism is part of every politician and leader throughout human history, including the good ones, so I suppose that is true. But the take away lesson should be that the American people don't want a gun grabbing, deep state, big government president so much they are willing to elect a person like Donald Trump in order to avoid it. It sure doesn't sound like the Democratic party yet understands the lesson.
But the take away lesson should be that the American people don't want a gun grabbing, deep state, big government president so much they are willing to elect a person like Donald Trump in order to avoid it.
The American people voted for Clinton.
The American people voted for Clinton.
Excuse me, the American People of the 50 states, in accordance with the rules of our constitutional republic, elected Donald Trump in an electoral landslide.
em2nought
01-30-20, 01:39 AM
Excuse me, the American People of the 50 states, in accordance with the rules of our constitutional republic, elected Donald Trump in an electoral landslide.
If only someone had explained the rules to Killary. :har:
Skybird
01-30-20, 02:31 AM
Excuse me, the American People of the 50 states, in accordance with the rules of our constitutional republic, elected Donald Trump in an electoral landslide.
Lil boy was defeated by number of votes. your system is manipulation of the laws of math. voting districts get hilariously fought about their exact borders to deny voting majorities within one districts borders to the other party or secure that bordrts are such that one party has an own majority. its a known problem and one that gets criticised time and again.
And you know it.
Fact is that not even every fifth citizen eligible to vote, voted for Trump, if I recall it correctly. clinton got more votes.
the whole concept of electoral college today is obscur and dubios. it allows minorities to defeat majorities and thus destroys the very idea of majority voting.
nothing in that system to be celebrated as holy and best of the best. its one of the worst and most corrupted systems i know. additionally to the parties own level of inherent corruption.
Skybird
01-30-20, 05:03 AM
From what I understand Boltons book contains classified material, some of it rated Top Secret, and he was just told to remove it before publishing,
And who says that this claim is true? Says the accused (his accomplices). who wants the book prohibited because it is to his personal disadvantage.
I say again, Bolton is in business long enough to know what top secret and classified material is. At least one would expect that. He would not intentionally make himself vulnerable by releasing classified material.
u crank
01-30-20, 09:56 AM
And who says that this claim is true? Says the accused (his accomplices). who wants the book prohibited because it is to his personal disadvantage.
I say again, Bolton is in business long enough to know what top secret and classified material is. At least one would expect that. He would not intentionally make himself vulnerable by releasing classified material.
Bolton will have to live by the rules that will be inforced by the National Security Council. Like it or not. But I'm sure Bolton knows this. He has been in high profile posts before.
“Under federal law and the nondisclosure agreements your client signed as a condition for gaining access to classified information, the manuscript may not be published or otherwise disclosed without the deletion of this classified information,” said the letter, dated Jan. 23, a copy of which was reviewed by The Wall Street Journal. The letter was signed by Ellen Knight, senior director for Records, Access and Information Security Management at the NSC.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/white-house-says-john-boltons-manuscript-cant-be-published-as-is-11580332992
Former administration officials who have held a security clearance are required to submit manuscripts to the agency that held their clearance—in Mr. Bolton’s case, the NSC. Federal law prohibits the disclosure of classified information. As part of the process of obtaining a security clearance, Mr. Bolton had to agree to obtain signoff from the administration before disclosing information about his time at the White House, including by writing a book.
CNN's framing of the letter as a 'threat' is typical 'bombshell' reporting. It's standard procedure.
Rockstar
01-30-20, 09:58 AM
and lets not kid ourselves either, controversy sells books.
Onkel Neal
01-30-20, 10:56 AM
Fact is that not even every fifth citizen eligible to vote, voted for Trump, if I recall it correctly. clinton got more votes.
the whole concept of electoral college today is obscur and dubios. it allows minorities to defeat majorities and thus destroys the very idea of majority voting.
nothing in that system to be celebrated as holy and best of the best. its one of the worst and most corrupted systems i know. additionally to the parties own level of inherent corruption.
Bill's wife got ~ 3 million more votes than Trump,
https://www.270towin.com/2016_Election/
AVGWarhawk
01-30-20, 02:30 PM
Lil boy was defeated by number of votes. your system is manipulation of the laws of math. voting districts get hilariously fought about their exact borders to deny voting majorities within one districts borders to the other party or secure that bordrts are such that one party has an own majority. its a known problem and one that gets criticised time and again.
And you know it.
Fact is that not even every fifth citizen eligible to vote, voted for Trump, if I recall it correctly. clinton got more votes.
the whole concept of electoral college today is obscur and dubios. it allows minorities to defeat majorities and thus destroys the very idea of majority voting.
nothing in that system to be celebrated as holy and best of the best. its one of the worst and most corrupted systems i know. additionally to the parties own level of inherent corruption.
It does not matter. The game is not played by the number of votes. Trump was playing the correct game and won. I have no idea what Hillary Clinton was playing. At the end of the day, no matter how obscure or whatever..the electoral college serves a purpose.
The look of a person who sat her laurels and figured it was in the bag:
https://c.ndtvimg.com/2018-12/nhevkt8o_hillary-clinton_625x300_16_December_18.jpg
AVGWarhawk
01-30-20, 02:42 PM
And who says that this claim is true? Says the accused (his accomplices). who wants the book prohibited because it is to his personal disadvantage.
I say again, Bolton is in business long enough to know what top secret and classified material is. At least one would expect that. He would not intentionally make himself vulnerable by releasing classified material.
Book sales will be up for Bolton who dislikes Trump for sending him packing. There is no doubt Bolton was looking to score a retirement with writing a book about the "Trump Years". This impeachment hearing landed in his lap as a great launch pad for sales to skyrocket. See it for what it is. Furthermore, Schiff years ago said Bolton was less than stellar with, well, anything. But today Bolton is a star witness with book in hand. As Trump tweeted...GAME OVER.
This crap and conspiracy has gone on so long I have forgotten what the "articles of impeachment" are. J-walking or something? Such a damn waste of time and money.
Has anyone seen the Russians and collusion? I visited Trump Tower in NY. I did not see Russians there either.
At the end of the day...HILLARY was supposed to win. None of the Hunter Biden under investigation(dad saved is butt and make millions as well), Russian collusion with the DNC and Obama's hand in the 2016 election was NOT to come out in the sunlight. But here we are on the cusp of some very interesting happenings with the Bidens and the Ukraine.
Skybird
01-30-20, 02:51 PM
It does not matter. The game is not played by the number of votes. Trump was playing the correct game and won. I have no idea what Hillary Clinton was playing. At the end of the day, no matter how obscure or whatever..the electoral college serves a purpose.
Its a rigged game, plain and simple. It always has been. And nobody should dare to claim that this system is a "democratic" one. It'S not, not in the meaning of "democratic" in modern reinterpretation of te word, nor in the meaning of the very different ancient Greek conception of the term and by the ancient Greek city states' example. All Wetsern models are what ancient Greek wpouiöld label as the antagonoist of true dmeocracy, they would see it is tyranny, a mix of the three base formats they knew of "tyrannis".
I do not mean no unilaterally bash the Us here, its illustrated by me many times that I bash other states, including Germany and Europe, as harsh as well. Its just that the U poses in the world as being the shining role model for all world to admire and follow. It isn'T. Its as corrupted, maybe even worse so due to its immense power and the fallout that creates, than all others as well.
Skybird
01-30-20, 02:53 PM
Has anyone seen the Russians and collusion? I visited Trump Tower in NY. I did not see Russians there either.
No comment.
Skybird
01-30-20, 02:58 PM
Bill's wife got ~ 3 million more votes than Trump,
https://www.270towin.com/2016_Election/
Yes. And I add this, it calculates the non-voters into it as well. Some of them are lazy or donot care. But then tzhere are so many who are like me, and chose to actively deny giving legitimation to a rigged show and dubious personnel.
Trump can unite only 18% of the totla population behind his vote. Of those citizens who are eligible to vote, which obviously is a lower number than the total population, he unites just a bit more than one quarter.
That means almost three quarters of the citizens eligible to vote3, denied to give him their vote. And 82% of the total population in the US did not vote for him.
So much for that. Trump is not represtentative, in no way, for the population of the US. He only benefits from riugged rules of a rigged system.
Thats what foreigners should not forget when wanting to condemn all Americans alltogether. It would be unfair. The overwhelming majority refuses to support him.
https://www.welt.de/img/politik/ausland/mobile159411731/1731625127-ci23x11-w1600/DWO-AP-ehrliches-Wahlergebnis.jpg
AVGWarhawk
01-30-20, 03:09 PM
Its a rigged game, plain and simple. It always has been. And nobody should dare to claim that this system is a "democratic" one. It'S not, not in the meaning of "democratic" in modern reinterpretation of te word, nor in the meaning of the very different ancient Greek conception of the term and by the ancient Greek city states' example. All Wetsern models are what ancient Greek wpouiöld label as the antagonoist of true dmeocracy, they would see it is tyranny, a mix of the three base formats they knew of "tyrannis".
I do not mean no unilaterally bash the Us here, its illustrated by me many times that I bash other states, including Germany and Europe, as harsh as well. Its just that the U poses in the world as being the shining role model for all world to admire and follow. It isn'T. Its as corrupted, maybe even worse so due to its immense power and the fallout that creates, than all others as well.
It is highly unlikely the forefathers that worked on and instituted the electoral college did so knowing it was a rigged game. The US is not a democracy, so you are correct, no one would or should call the system "democratic". But again, relevant or not, Trump and his team played the electoral college game and won. That is how it is played by the rules instituted. We can talk about it for years but it will not change the outcome of the 2016 election. I do not see the electoral college going away in your and my lifetime. As such, those running better figure out the game as quickly as Trump.
How a person who has nothing but a life of political experience, backed by people with a life of political experience lose the electoral college game is beyond me. She fell asleep at the helm(again) and lost at her own game. A game that was rigged in her favor!
AVGWarhawk
01-30-20, 03:11 PM
No comment.
I'm certain you have a comment. You just have not formulated it. :yeah:
Important of all - It's their election system and it's only around a Presidential election voices are raised to change it.
True Hillary got a lot more votes then Trump
From my memory(days after the election in 2016)
In the Danish primetime news program
Hillary won the biggest cities and the American with an average income above---something(forgot the word)
Trump won the Midwest and people with low income
(there are of course rich people who vote Dem or Rep and poor who do the same.
When this reporter told those things I do remember thinking of what some of you had written here on our forum and what some of my friends wrote on FB.
Markus
Bilge_Rat
01-31-20, 09:34 AM
The Electoral College is what it is. It is actually the same basic model that you have for elections in the UK or Canada. With a first past the post system, you can get into a situation where one party gets more seats (electoral votes) even though another party gets more votes.
We just had an election in Canada in 2019. Trudeau's Liberals got less votes (5.9 million) than the conservatives (6.1 million), but the liberals won 157 seats to the Conservatives 121, which is why Trudeau jr. is still PM.
The difference between Canadians and Americans is that we are not going to spend the next 2-3 years arguing that Trudeau's election was illegitimate.
The important thing in a Democracy is that the rules are known beforehand and applied the same to every candidate. Trump won fair and square. Period.
The important thing in a Democracy is that the rules are known beforehand and applied the same to every candidate. Trump won fair and square. Period. Pelosi & friends haven't gotten that memo.
Onkel Neal
01-31-20, 10:48 AM
Impeachment: it ends today. :up:
AVGWarhawk
01-31-20, 12:22 PM
You know this guy is doing this right now:
https://i.gifer.com/3Man.gif
Mr Quatro
01-31-20, 02:16 PM
Okay I finally figured it out ... :up:
If you have a football team or a baseball team or a basketball team
that has four extra players ... Know what I mean? :yep:
Four more players than the other side on the field or floor at the same time
the team with the four extra players is going to win :yep:
Same with the impeachment hearings in the US Senate going on right now
The GOP has four extra players and a couple may cross over to the other side,
but the GOP still has the numbers to stop this impeachment today :yep:
Impeachment: it ends today. :up:
This round maybe.
Skybird
01-31-20, 05:57 PM
An investigation trial where complices of the accused can vote to have no witnesses questioned anmd no evidenmce seen and checked that could harm their man.
Hilarious. 51 chimps in a freak show.
A group that knows the game is rigged and the rules are meant to allow rigging, and although haviong no majrity nevertehless starting it.
Hilarious. 47 chimps in a freak show.
Two Republicans posing as having understood this and disagree to play by rigged rules.
2 chimps learning about the meaning of evolution.
America has made a ridicule of itself with this performance. Insisting to be the moral and political role model for the world, is no more an option.
I see the peanut gallery has chimed in. This "impeachment" was nothing more than a hatchet job from the start.
For someone who is innocent, there sure seems to be a lot of hiding and pants sh!tting.
Be ready to reap what you sow GOP.
Trump impeachment: Failed witnesses vote paves way for acquittal
US President Donald Trump is set to be acquitted in his impeachment trial after senators voted against calling witnesses or admitting new evidence.
Democrats hoped four swing Republicans would vote for witnesses, which would have extended the trial without in all likelihood changing its outcome.
In the end, only two of the four Republicans voted with Democrats.
The trial now moves forward to a vote on whether to acquit President Trump, which he is all but certain to win.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-51335661
:hmmm:
Be ready to reap what you sow GOP.
I think they stand to do pretty well. They might even get control of the House back in November.
u crank
01-31-20, 07:01 PM
Be ready to reap what you sow GOP.
That's gonna cut both ways. The next Democrat president may get the same treatment.
Buddahaid
01-31-20, 07:09 PM
Or maybe, just maybe, we might start to see candidates that haven't compromised themselves getting there. :hmmm: :arrgh!:Nah!
Onkel Neal
01-31-20, 07:16 PM
For someone who is innocent, there sure seems to be a lot of hiding and pants sh!tting.
Be ready to reap what you sow GOP.
Keep in mind, the democrats are determined to get him out office, they would vote to convict no matter what. They want witnesses called but no matter what the evidence showed, they would vote to convict.
Republicans just the same but inverted; they want to rub their chins and consider the evidence but with or without witnesses, they would vote to acquit. Anything short of credible video evidence of Trump saying "I want to get Ukraine involved in our elections" they would vote to acquit.
No different than the last impeachment. Clinton was caught red handed perjuring himself in a grand jury testimony but the Democrats decided to acquit him regardless.
Facts don't really matter in either case.
Or maybe, just maybe, we might start to see candidates that haven't compromised themselves getting there. :hmmm: :arrgh!:Nah!
I wish! Hillary Clinton refuses to be served Tulsi Gabbard’s defamation lawsuit (https://nypost.com/2020/01/29/hillary-clinton-refuses-to-be-served-tulsi-gabbards-defamation-lawsuit/)
u crank
01-31-20, 07:23 PM
Or maybe, just maybe, we might start to see candidates that haven't compromised themselves getting there. :hmmm: :arrgh!:Nah!
:D You mean like Joe Biden?
Keep in mind, the democrats are determined to get him out office, they would vote to convict no matter what. They want witnesses called but no matter what the evidence showed, they would vote to convict.
Republicans just the same but inverted; they want to rub their chins and consider the evidence but with or without witnesses, they would vote to acquit. Anything short of credible video evidence of Trump saying "I want to get Ukraine involved in our elections" they would vote to acquit.
No different than the last impeachment. Clinton was caught red handed perjuring himself in a grand jury testimony but the Democrats decided to acquit him regardless.
Facts don't really matter in either case.
Oh, I agree with you and held no illusions that Trump would be removed from office as a result of his impeachment.
What bewilders me is the GOP senators and Trump's defense saying there's not enough evidence or no first hand witnesses, yet they vote to not introduce new evidedence or witnesses. If Trump is innocent, the evidence and witnesses would be in his favor.
Again, there sure is a lot to hide it seems. Both Bolton and Parnas, by their own words, would have been willing to testify under oath. Trump's impeachment stigma will not go away this way and GOP, being short sighted as usual, will (in a reasonable world) suffer from this.
Oh, I agree with you and held no illusions that Trump would be removed from office as a result of his impeachment.
What bewilders me is the GOP senators and Trump's defense saying there's not enough evidence or no first hand witnesses, yet they vote to not introduce new evidedence or witnesses. If Trump is innocent, the evidence and witnesses would be in his favor.
Again, there sure is a lot to hide it seems. Both Bolton and Parnas, by their own words, would have been willing to testify under oath. Trump's impeachment stigma will not go away this way and GOP, being short sighted as usual, will (in a reasonable world) suffer from this.
What impeachment stigma would that be? The impeachment from start to finish has been a completely partisan undertaking. All it shows is that his political enemies hate him a lot. Well good I say. They can continue right on hating him until he leaves office in 2025 and I hope they choke on their hatred.
Onkel Neal
01-31-20, 09:02 PM
Oh, I agree with you and held no illusions that Trump would be removed from office as a result of his impeachment.
What bewilders me is the GOP senators and Trump's defense saying there's not enough evidence or no first hand witnesses, yet they vote to not introduce new evidedence or witnesses. If Trump is innocent, the evidence and witnesses would be in his favor.
Again, there sure is a lot to hide it seems. Both Bolton and Parnas, by their own words, would have been willing to testify under oath. Trump's impeachment stigma will not go away this way and GOP, being short sighted as usual, will (in a reasonable world) suffer from this.
But would Biden and Biden been willing to testify? Old Joe was in charge of Ukraine policy for Barack Obama when the drugaddled jr Joe was getting a no show job from a Ukrainian company that was considered crooked.
em2nought
01-31-20, 09:06 PM
Next shot at Trump, an oldie but a goodie! :03:
https://media.iwradio.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/31102439/skynews-e-jean-carroll-donald-trump_4907012.jpg
Sailor Steve
01-31-20, 09:09 PM
I see the peanut gallery has chimed in. This "impeachment" was nothing more than a hatchet job from the start.
The last one was no different.
Mr Quatro
01-31-20, 09:29 PM
Again, there sure is a lot to hide it seems. Both Bolton and Parnas, by their own words, would have been willing to testify under oath.
Bolton already had that chance when the trial was in the House, but he said then that he would sue if they called him :o
His book wasn't ready yet :D
The last one was no different. That may be, however in Clinton's case there was actual malfeasance. He lost his law license for 5 years and was forced to resign from the Supreme Court bar and fined 25,000.00$ as a result of those impeachment charges.
Sailor Steve
01-31-20, 10:21 PM
I bow to your superior knowledge in this matter.
Buddahaid
01-31-20, 10:51 PM
The fat lady has yet to sing.
The fat lady has yet to sing.
I don't doubt it. The Democrats have something else up their sleeves and there is still a lot of time before the election. Not that I think Trumps reelection will stop them either.
Mr Quatro
02-01-20, 02:05 PM
I don't have a link, but I heard a rumor that the democrats are going to keep on investigating President Trumps involvement of
withholding funds to Ukraine in exchange for dirt on Joe Biden's son.
Why I do not know perhaps to keep the ball rolling all the way to the election :o
Putting a pressure on another country, mostly third world country, is not unique.
Almost every country in the west have done it or are doing it.
Some years back the former liberal right wing government i Denmark put pressure on Somalia, ´cause they wasn't interesting in taking back some of their former citizens.
And from my memory-The Danish government threaten to withhold their economical support.
I can't say if some of these countries have done it the same way as Trump is accused of.
Markus
Catfish
02-01-20, 02:34 PM
A hearing without witnesses is not much of a hearing.
I don't have a link, but I heard a rumor that the democrats are going to keep on investigating President Trumps involvement of
withholding funds to Ukraine in exchange for dirt on Joe Biden's son.
Why I do not know perhaps to keep the ball rolling all the way to the election :o
That was the whole purpose of demanding witnesses in the senate trial. To drag this all out. To keep their media shills supplied with daily bombshells in order to keep the taint of investigation on Trump so he's running for reelection against that as well as the Democrat candidate who will have scant else to run on. Now they will have to come up with another scandal to fill that Russia collusion/Ukraine meddling Orange Man Bad hole they have dug for themselves.
u crank
02-01-20, 02:50 PM
I don't have a link, but I heard a rumor that the democrats are going to keep on investigating President Trumps involvement of
withholding funds to Ukraine in exchange for dirt on Joe Biden's son.
This is what they should have been doing all along. Impeachment was a bridge to far and for Democrats a bad hill to die on. For President Trump, well after an impeachment acquittal ....."what else have you got?"
Jeff-Groves
02-01-20, 04:56 PM
I don't have a link, but I heard a rumor that the democrats are going to keep on investigating President Trump
I heard a rumor he has grey hairs on his nut bag.
WTF? No link? Total BS!
Skybird
02-01-20, 07:34 PM
https://edition.cnn.com/2020/02/01/politics/trump-ukraine-aid-emails-omb-justice-department/index.html
Skybird
02-01-20, 08:16 PM
This is what they should have been doing all along. Impeachment was a bridge to far and for Democrats a bad hill to die on. For President Trump, well after an impeachment acquittal ....."what else have you got?"
The mafia has rules and loyalties it follows. So have the Republicans.
Hayek: "In government, the scum raises to the top." Proven and illustrated by the llustration of a hearing not allowing witnesses. That was not a rule of the impeachment trial - that was a decision made by the accomplices of the accused. Who happend to form the jury. How stupid a mechanism.
In the politics of the US today, there is nothing left anymore that forces one to discriminate them from other political ratholes and lousy regimes on this planet. Scum is scum and corruption is corruption, no matter what passport it holds. Anti-Americanism has finally been turned from a left-leanign folly into a civil duty for every reaosnable, civilised man. That is Trumps' heritage and gift for America. It will outlive him by long, long time. This America must be feared, yes - but nothing more than this.
give it a rest, it's over. If those emails were that important all Schiff had to do was subpoena them. He chose not to.
As far as I can gather, the democrats were Hoisted with their own petard.
Rockstar
02-01-20, 09:00 PM
Witnesses? Overwhelming case? Its the Schiff Show!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ehew5rMr6zo
em2nought
02-02-20, 07:01 AM
The mafia has rules and loyalties it follows. So have the Republicans.
Hayek: "In government, the scum raises to the top." Proven and illustrated by the llustration of a hearing not allowing witnesses. That was not a rule of the impeachment trial - that was a decision made by the accomplices of the accused. Who happend to form the jury. How stupid a mechanism.
In the politics of the US today, there is nothing left anymore that forces one to discriminate them from other political ratholes and lousy regimes on this planet. Scum is scum and corruption is corruption, no matter what passport it holds. Anti-Americanism has finally been turned from a left-leanign folly into a civil duty for every reaosnable, civilised man. That is Trumps' heritage and gift for America. It will outlive him by long, long time. This America must be feared, yes - but nothing more than this.
Somehow I have the feeling that if you had your own "Trump" who was leading Germany out of being the European Unions' sugar daddy and the Middle Easts' foster parents for terrorists you'd be hoisting him on your shoulders instead of burning him at the stake. I think you're jealous because well, Merkel. :D
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/imageserver/image/methode%2Ftimes%2Fprod%2Fweb%2Fbin%2Fb133d84e-a51a-11e7-8955-1ad2a9a7928d.jpg?crop=1724%2C969%2C0%2C90&resize=685
Catfish
02-02-20, 07:28 AM
^ The Nazis are strong again here.
u crank
02-02-20, 08:21 AM
The mafia has rules and loyalties it follows. So have the Republicans.
This is a good explanation as to why the impeachment failed. Blaming compliant Republicans for it misses the very much larger issue. The real reason is the bumbling, incompetent manner in which it was prosecuted.
After the Senate rejected witnesses and effectively ended the impeachment trial on Friday, the media ignored the primary reason for the defeat, which is the insistence of House leaders to impeach Trump by Christmas. Critics of the president simply do not want to hear that the blind rush to impeach guaranteed not only an acquittal but an easy case for acquittal. It is after all important for some members of the media to maintain that fools dwell only in Republican red states.
https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/481015-how-the-house-lost-the-witness-battle-along-with-impeachment
This Skybird is much closer to the truth than your mafia analogy.
This very series of events was expressly laid out before the vote, and House Democrats made a decision to choose certain failure over completing their impeachment case. There was no reason to expect Senate Republicans to assist House managers in making their case, particularly in calling witnesses not subpoenaed by the House. Democrats had opposed any witnesses in the impeachment trial of President Clinton and voted as a bloc for a summary acquittal. There was no reason to expect Republicans to adopt an entirely different approach.
The left wing media's constant crowing about the brilliant strategies and elloquent talents of Pelosi, Schiff and Nadler are now a joke. Continuing to blame Republican Senators for the Democrat leadership's failure is a refusal to face reality.
The hard truth is that House Democrats lost this case the minute they rushed an impeachment vote, and they knew it. With the approaching Iowa caucuses, they chose a failed impeachment rather than taking a few more months to work on a more complete case against Trump, a case more difficult to summarily dismiss. That is the hard truth.
^ The Nazis are strong again here.
Those anti-Merkel demonstrators in that picture are nazis? But I don't see a swastika or heil salute among them. What gives?
Those anti-Merkel demonstrators in that picture are nazis? But I don't see a swastika or heil salute among them. What gives?
If you look at the blue Ballons in the front of the picture you will can see three words
Alternative für Deutschland (AfD)
They are a right wing party (I can't say how far right they are)
Some Germans see them as nazis.
Markus
If you look at the blue Ballons in the front of the picture you will can see three words
Alternative für Deutschland (AfD)
They are a right wing party (I can't say how far right they are)
Some Germans see them as nazis.
Markus
I see, kinda like how some American Democrats see Republicans I suspect. :03:
ikalugin
02-03-20, 08:20 AM
https://static.wixstatic.com/ugd/3ba8a1_4f06e99f35d4485b801f8dbfe33b6a3f.pdf
The report about how US think tanks active in foreighn policy are funded.
Spoiler - they recieve millions from foreighn states (not Russia).
em2nought
02-03-20, 02:19 PM
If you look at the blue Balloons in the front of the picture you will can see three words
Alternative für Deutschland (AfD)
They are a right wing party (I can't say how far right they are)
Some Germans see them as nazis.
Markus
Thanks for explaining, for a minute there I thought you were calling me a Nazi. :03:
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.