1 2 3 > 
 
   
 

The Senate Trial

 
Brick Bungalow
 
Avatar
 
 
Brick Bungalow
Total Posts:  5305
Joined  28-05-2009
 
 
 
17 January 2020 22:32
 

I figured this will be a running donkey show. I’m terrified by the potential discord of this event. But also excited to witness a pretty unprecedented historical event.

I noticed that the motion was put forward to recuse Mitch McConnell based on his comments about essentially representing the defense in advance of any presented evidence. Is the decision to do that up to John Roberts? Is that something that could reasonably happen?

 
LadyJane
 
Avatar
 
 
LadyJane
Total Posts:  3520
Joined  26-03-2013
 
 
 
18 January 2020 05:45
 

You are part of the story.  Here is a handy list, for convenience, so you folks can choose your own adventure. 

https://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm

Please don’t hesitate to both call and write.

 
 
Celal
 
Avatar
 
 
Celal
Total Posts:  3308
Joined  07-08-2011
 
 
 
18 January 2020 12:21
 

I knew we were in for a treat when I saw the line-up of Democratic impeachment managers in this political theater.  How could you not laugh? Was there ever a better, more amusing duo than Jerry Nadler and Adam Schiffs flanked by bunch of other morons, misbegotten ninnies? Their main arguments should have better served them if they led with “their feelings were hurt” by the Orange Man rather than the “obstruction of Congress”.  These hapless bunch will most likely be humiliated in front of the whole nation as they can no longer control the rules and convene to basement Gestapo style meetings. BTW, for the uninformed, every time a President “veto"s a bill, it obstructs THE Congress. The real Congress includes House and the Senate. Not just the morons who called the House of Representatives “Congress”.

I hope they call additional witnesses. Wouldn’t you like to hear from the son of doddering fool Joe Biden, the drug addict who was kicked out of Navy reserve and listen to him testify against Trump’s request for investigation and convince the country how he was NOT corrupt in his business dealings with foreign Countries while his daddy was the VP.

 
Twissel
 
Avatar
 
 
Twissel
Total Posts:  3047
Joined  19-01-2015
 
 
 
18 January 2020 15:25
 

You are laughing at the House Managers but not Dershowitz and Starr?
You might need reminding who else Dershowitz has defended in the past ..  and what Starr once thought was worthy of Impeachment.
Those two are a big fucking joke.

 
 
burt
 
Avatar
 
 
burt
Total Posts:  16024
Joined  17-12-2006
 
 
 
18 January 2020 19:15
 
Twissel - 18 January 2020 03:25 PM

You are laughing at the House Managers but not Dershowitz and Starr?
You might need reminding who else Dershowitz has defended in the past ..  and what Starr once thought was worthy of Impeachment.
Those two are a big fucking joke.

Don’t worry, Celal doesn’t care about the constitution, only Trump.

 
Brick Bungalow
 
Avatar
 
 
Brick Bungalow
Total Posts:  5305
Joined  28-05-2009
 
 
 
18 January 2020 23:35
 

I don’t think any Republicans have suggested that they would vote in favor but several have said that they do favor the calling of witnesses and have expressed distress at the dismissive attitudes of McConnell and Graham.

I don’t really endorse any particular outcome but I do hope that both sides can call witnesses. If not, this truly is just a huge waste of time.

 
Celal
 
Avatar
 
 
Celal
Total Posts:  3308
Joined  07-08-2011
 
 
 
20 January 2020 16:57
 
Twissel - 18 January 2020 03:25 PM

You are laughing at the House Managers but not Dershowitz and Starr?
You might need reminding who else Dershowitz has defended in the past ..  and what Starr once thought was worthy of Impeachment.
Those two are a big fucking joke.

Attached photo is the joke.

Do you really believe these phonies who look like the people’s court rejects with the pretense solemnity of the journey from one end of the building to the other? Are you really that dim witted to buy into this nonsense? Regardless of the pretense, it looks more like a funeral march of their own party’s demise. Depending on the witnesses called, the burial service will take place in the next couple of weeks.

In lieu of flowers, you may send donations to Hunter Biden who has no gainful employment, no free rides, no seats on Boards of foreign companies for the real quid pro quo. 

BTW, what is up with the front runner Joe Biden? During the last debate he seemed incoherent, lost and dazed. Wait….. that is nothing new. Never mind. But the Dems have a real deep bench. I’m sure someone will step in to save the party, May be Pete Buttigieg, the guy who looks like a vacuum cleaner   salesman.

I cant wait for the trial. Can you?

 

Image Attachments
 
impeachment.JPG
 
 
Twissel
 
Avatar
 
 
Twissel
Total Posts:  3047
Joined  19-01-2015
 
 
 
20 January 2020 19:09
 

How certain would it be for Biden to be accused of being part of the Epstein minor abuse ring if Epstein’s lawyer ( who is implicated himself) offered to defend him for free?

 
 
unsmoked
 
Avatar
 
 
unsmoked
Total Posts:  9024
Joined  20-02-2006
 
 
 
21 January 2020 11:08
 

All the senators need are Trump’s tax returns.  Then they can go ahead and dismiss the case for impeachment while the world watches.

But what about Trump’s success in one-upping China?  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rAlLTSTBwUQ

 
 
Antisocialdarwinist
 
Avatar
 
 
Antisocialdarwinist
Total Posts:  6954
Joined  08-12-2006
 
 
 
22 January 2020 12:25
 

Of course Trump wanted Ukraine to investigate the Bidens for his own political gain. Does any reasonable person believe he would have asked them to investigate a political ally in the same situation?

Of course the Democrats impeached Trump for their own political gain. Does any reasonable person believe they would have impeached a Democrat in the same situation?

Nevertheless, despite their respective ulterior motives, it’s not unreasonable to suspect that the Bidens were peddling influence and should have been investigated; just as it’s not unreasonable to suspect that Trump was holding back aid to Ukraine for his own political gain and deserved to be impeached.

So round and round it goes, another episode of our neverending political reality show.

I agree with those who suggest that the Democrats would have been smarter to censure Trump. That would have been more politically damaging to him and less damaging to the Democrats. Republicans (some of them) would have been more likely to support censure than impeachment and the whole sordid affair wouldn’t have seemed purely partisan.

 
 
unsmoked
 
Avatar
 
 
unsmoked
Total Posts:  9024
Joined  20-02-2006
 
 
 
22 January 2020 13:47
 

Fear in Washington.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LofdaC-sztI

Would Republican senators find their careers ruined if they voted to impeach Trump?  Is this why Brick calls this trial a ‘running donkey show’ in the OP?

https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/400423-trump-i-destroy-careers-of-republicans-who-say-bad-things-about-me

President Trump bragged about his prowess in defeating the Republicans who oppose him, saying at an Ohio rally that he “destroys” the careers of GOP politicians who dare defy him.

“How do you get 100 percent of anything? We always have somebody who says ‘I don’t like Trump, I don’t like our president, he destroyed my career,’ ” Trump said.

“I only destroy their career because they said bad things about me and you fight back and they go down the tubes and that’s OK,” he added.

Do we need further proof that democracy died in the U.S. in 2016?  Are we imagining that Roberts doesn’t know what’s going on here?

 

[ Edited: 22 January 2020 14:04 by unsmoked]
 
 
BarfootSage
 
Avatar
 
 
BarfootSage
Total Posts:  67
Joined  08-12-2019
 
 
 
22 January 2020 14:25
 
Antisocialdarwinist - 22 January 2020 12:25 PM

Of course Trump wanted Ukraine to investigate the Bidens for his own political gain. Does any reasonable person believe he would have asked them to investigate a political ally in the same situation?

Of course the Democrats impeached Trump for their own political gain. Does any reasonable person believe they would have impeached a Democrat in the same situation?

Nevertheless, despite their respective ulterior motives, it’s not unreasonable to suspect that the Bidens were peddling influence and should have been investigated; just as it’s not unreasonable to suspect that Trump was holding back aid to Ukraine for his own political gain and deserved to be impeached.

So round and round it goes, another episode of our neverending political reality show.

I agree with those who suggest that the Democrats would have been smarter to censure Trump. That would have been more politically damaging to him and less damaging to the Democrats. Republicans (some of them) would have been more likely to support censure than impeachment and the whole sordid affair wouldn’t have seemed purely partisan.

Nice point.  The issue of Impeachment up until now has been spinning it’s wheel because of years of America’s foreign policy pulling these kinds of punches as standard operating procedures.  While Trump alleges that he has done nothing wrong in light of standard shady foreign policy practices it is still underhanded and crooked.  And because Trump was already doing this kind of dirty business dealings before he became a self made politician he got caught red handed on the world stage as opposed to a domestic one.
There is no way his campaign can survive.  And if it does and he manages to get reelected because to the proliferating of the ruling elites of ‘Far Right’ being in power on multiple front then it will just be fuel to the fire in the movement to become more ‘woke’ in it’s wake.  Am I right? 
Sam seems to be carving out a niche for a deeper center to exist.  Whereby the displaced values of the ‘Far Left’ come into alignment with walking the talk.  And rational thinking based on science and statistics stand and sit in the new political climate.

 
 
Brick Bungalow
 
Avatar
 
 
Brick Bungalow
Total Posts:  5305
Joined  28-05-2009
 
 
 
22 January 2020 20:28
 

It almost seems as if Trump was impeached for bragging about the solicitation rather than the solicitation itself. At any rate I would agree with the notion that his big mouth puts us all at risk. Anyway, I was glad to see the White House release some budget documents. Can they do that without Presidential approval?

 
Celal
 
Avatar
 
 
Celal
Total Posts:  3308
Joined  07-08-2011
 
 
 
23 January 2020 08:47
 
Antisocialdarwinist - 22 January 2020 12:25 PM

Of course Trump wanted Ukraine to investigate the Bidens for his own political gain. Does any reasonable person believe he would have asked them to investigate a political ally in the same situation?

Of course the Democrats impeached Trump for their own political gain. Does any reasonable person believe they would have impeached a Democrat in the same situation?

Nevertheless, despite their respective ulterior motives, it’s not unreasonable to suspect that the Bidens were peddling influence and should have been investigated; just as it’s not unreasonable to suspect that Trump was holding back aid to Ukraine for his own political gain and deserved to be impeached.

So round and round it goes, another episode of our neverending political reality show.

I agree with those who suggest that the Democrats would have been smarter to censure Trump. That would have been more politically damaging to him and less damaging to the Democrats. Republicans (some of them) would have been more likely to support censure than impeachment and the whole sordid affair wouldn’t have seemed purely partisan.

You make reasonable points. That much is obvious.

Here’s something even more obvious.  The US has a treaty with Ukraine on mutual legal assistance in criminal matters signed at Kiev on July 22, 1998.
https://www.congress.gov/treaty-document/106th-congress/16/document-text

Since Trump was talking clearly about the “past” wrong doings including in 2016, why does “mutual legal assistance in criminal matters” not apply to Trump? Hunter Biden all but confessed in his ABC interview why he was put on the payroll and papa Biden bragged on videotape how he strong armed Ukraine into shutting down their Burisma investigation by threatening to withhold a billion-dollar aid. 

What is the argument for not investigating these guys with this kind of evidence on tape?  Is it simply because Joe is running a feeble campaign where it is even doubtful he will get his party’s nomination?  Dont get it.

 
Twissel
 
Avatar
 
 
Twissel
Total Posts:  3047
Joined  19-01-2015
 
 
 
23 January 2020 11:36
 

You deliberately ignore the context of the Biden quote. There is nothing nefarious about it. Nothing at all.

But you are right on the agreement - so why did Trump send Rudi and not used the DOJ?
Obviously, none of them thought what they were doing was legal.

 
 
Antisocialdarwinist
 
Avatar
 
 
Antisocialdarwinist
Total Posts:  6954
Joined  08-12-2006
 
 
 
23 January 2020 11:47
 
Twissel - 23 January 2020 11:36 AM

You deliberately ignore the context of the Biden quote. There is nothing nefarious about it. Nothing at all.

Except that the GAO said, of Trump, that the president cannot withhold money that was voted on by congress to be used for foreign aid. Wasn’t vice president Biden doing exactly that when he threatened to withhold aid if the Ukrainians didn’t fire the corrupt prosecutor? Speaking, as he claimed to be, for the president?

But you are right on the agreement - so why did Trump send Rudi and not used the DOJ?
Obviously, none of them thought what they were doing was legal.

I agree, he should have known better. Even if his intentions were entirely pure, he should have realized what a mess he’d create for himself given that the target of the requested investigation was a political rival. Trump often seems to be his own worst enemy.

That said, I don’t think it warrants removal from office and I suspect this whole shit-show will hurt the Democrats more than Trump in the election. But that, of course, remains to be seen. Nothing would surprise me anymore.

 
 
 1 2 3 >