Impeachment Hearings

[GMDino]

(01-21-2020, 10:42 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Lol!  If Biden is guilty of the same offense that the POTUS is being held liable for, then does he even really deserve to be a Presidential candidate??  Enough with the double standard crap already...

He's not.  That's a gop talking point not a true fact.  Again...proof please.

[BmorePat87]

(01-21-2020, 10:42 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Lol!  If Biden is guilty of the same offense that the POTUS is being held liable for, then does he even really deserve to be a Presidential candidate??  Enough with the double standard crap already...

So you cannot name a single President beyond Trump?

I get that you're used to making up stuff, but that's not how reality works. 

[SunsetBengal]

(01-21-2020, 10:44 PM)GMDino Wrote: He's not.  That's a gop talking point not a true fact.  Again...proof please.

(01-21-2020, 10:44 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: So you cannot name a single President beyond Trump?

I get that you're used to making up stuff, but that's not how reality works. 

Wow, you guys are in for a real slap of reality, when Trump is not only found not guilty by the Senate, but when he wins re-election by an even bigger landslide than in 2016.  

And, when both of those things happen, don't go around crying like nobody told you it was coming.

[BmorePat87]

(01-21-2020, 10:50 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Wow, you guys are in for a real slap of reality, when Trump is not only found not guilty by the Senate, but when he wins re-election by an even bigger landslide than in 2016.  

And, when both of those things happen, don't go around crying like nobody told you it was coming.

Just to be clear, you are not going to defend your statement that "so many before him have done exactly that", you're instead just going to change the subject?

Just want to be clear that you're acknowledging that you completely made that up.

[GMDino]

(01-21-2020, 10:50 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Wow, you guys are in for a real slap of reality, when Trump is not only found not guilty by the Senate, but when he wins re-election by an even bigger landslide than in 2016.  

And, when both of those things happen, don't go around crying like nobody told you it was coming.

I don't think any sane person believes the Senate will find him guilty as the gop holds a majority and have shown no interest in any of the proceedings.  And he might win again too.  Lots of people still support him...they also seem to have no interest in what he says and does except to deny he lies and claim he is being attacked all the time.

I'll just assume that you knew that and, much like the gop, would rather attack others than defend what you say it true.  So...thanks?

[HarleyDog]

Monica Lewinsky might testify. However, it's an old stain. Why hasn't anyone cleaned the curtains? Man, the Dems are reaching. Didn't they come out of the bunker long enough to realize we have science now? Damnit! Steven Colbert just cancelled my appearance on his show!

[GMDino]

.@realDonaldTrump’s lawyers have been complaining all day about being shut out of the House impeachment process, but here was Cipollone’s response to the House Judiciary Committee’s invitation to participate: pic.twitter.com/irhxbYZlwS

— George Conway (@gtconway3d) January 22, 2020

[*Nately120*]

(01-21-2020, 10:50 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Wow, you guys are in for a real slap of reality, when Trump is not only found not guilty by the Senate, but when he wins re-election by an even bigger landslide than in 2016.  

And, when both of those things happen, don't go around crying like nobody told you it was coming.

I haven't seen a voter vase this smug about an easy victory since democrats right before Hillary got more votes but still lost in a landslide. 

[BmorePat87]

(01-21-2020, 11:51 PM)Nately120 Wrote: I haven't seen a voter vase this smug about an easy victory since democrats right before Hillary got more votes but still lost in a landslide. 

The funny thing about people calling it a landslide is that it really just came down to 108,000 votes between 4 states.

The winner-take-all system for allocating electoral votes makes it seem like a landslide, but it was actually a microscopically slim electoral raise. 0.08% of the total voters casting their votes in 4 specific states. Less people than those who wrote in Bernie Sanders (not blaming him, just comparing how small the margin really was)

[Benton]

(01-21-2020, 11:14 PM)HarleyDog Wrote: Monica Lewinsky might testify. However, it's an old stain. Why hasn't anyone cleaned the curtains? Man, the Dems are reaching. Didn't they come out of the bunker long enough to realize we have science now? Damnit! Steven Colbert just cancelled my appearance on his show!

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-00719-4

Quote:On 11 March, US President Donald Trump released his budget proposal for the 2020 fiscal year, which begins on 1 October 2019.
...

“I think it would be a disaster for science if it was enacted,” says Benjamin Krinsky, associate director for legislative affairs at the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology in Bethesda, Maryland.

[Belsnickel]

So, reading over the remarks from yesterday I do find it interesting that the defense of Trump is that abuse of power is not an impeachable offense, but also how much the defense team lied. They really are just preying on the gullible. I can't believe how much of a disconnect from reality the actual defenders of Trump have. I would have zero issues with an acquittal of Trump is there was a good faith argument being made, but there isn't. The idea of "high crimes and misdemeanors" absolutely includes abuse of power and that they have chosen to drag the slimeball Dershowitz up there to reverse his position from 1999 is just showing how much the Republicans are reaching.

Their target audience is those that they have convinced that Joe Biden did something despite insurmountable evidence to the contrary. Those who don't understand facts and choose to ignore anything that disputes their world views.

[hollodero]

(01-21-2020, 10:50 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Wow, you guys are in for a real slap of reality, when Trump is not only found not guilty by the Senate, but when he wins re-election by an even bigger landslide than in 2016.  

And, when both of those things happen, don't go around crying like nobody told you it was coming.

Well, that looks plausible. Approval rating is up again, and the Senate will not find him guilty.

Let me ask you one thing though. Do you believe Trump did what he's accused of having done? Meaning, he held up aid - illegally - apppropriated by Congress to get a foreign countrty to announce (not actually do) an investigation into a political rival. You think that's all true or that it is a smear?

[SunsetBengal]

(01-22-2020, 09:23 AM)hollodero Wrote: Well, that looks plausible. Approval rating is up again, and the Senate will not find him guilty.

Let me ask you one thing though. Do you believe Trump did what he's accused of having done? Meaning, he held up aid - illegally - apppropriated by Congress to get a foreign countrty to announce (not actually do) an investigation into a political rival. You think that's all true or that it is a smear?

Honestly, I'm not sure what to actually believe.  I do have trouble accepting the reasoning of "he was just trying to launch an investigation on a political rival", as Biden has not been nominated as the candidate.

[GMDino]

(01-22-2020, 08:30 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: So, reading over the remarks from yesterday I do find it interesting that the defense of Trump is that abuse of power is not an impeachable offense, but also how much the defense team lied. They really are just preying on the gullible. I can't believe how much of a disconnect from reality the actual defenders of Trump have. I would have zero issues with an acquittal of Trump is there was a good faith argument being made, but there isn't. The idea of "high crimes and misdemeanors" absolutely includes abuse of power and that they have chosen to drag the slimeball Dershowitz up there to reverse his position from 1999 is just showing how much the Republicans are reaching.

Their target audience is those that they have convinced that Joe Biden did something despite insurmountable evidence to the contrary. Those who don't understand facts and choose to ignore anything that disputes their world views.

(01-22-2020, 09:32 AM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Honestly, I'm not sure what to actually believe.  I do have trouble accepting the reasoning of "he was just trying to launch an investigation on a political rival", as Biden has not been nominated as the candidate.

All seriousness aside I was thinking this morning about your post from yesterday (Sunset) and I'm wondering how you will react *IF* Trump loses in 2020?  Will it be a "slap of reality"?  Because I don't know what will happen.  Like Bmore said the last election was a lot closer than either side wants to admit.  Clinton dominated in the popular vote and Trump got just enough votes in the right states to dominate the electoral college.  If there is a higher voter turnout in 2020 DJT may be in trouble.

[hollodero]

(01-22-2020, 09:32 AM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Honestly, I'm not sure what to actually believe.  I do have trouble accepting the reasoning of "he was just trying to launch an investigation on a political rival", as Biden has not been nominated as the candidate.

I see. I would mention that Biden was leading the polls; and that the timing might be a question of opportunity presenting itself, with a new, inexperienced Ukrainian president. Who desperately needed the aid and the US support, in that particular time. 

Also, of course, there is quite a lot of testimony laying out that scheme. Now sure all witnesses could lie, but I have a way harder time imagining that. Many of those witnesses distinctly were not liberals, not anti Trumpers, one has donated one million to Trump. Hard to see their motive.

Guess what I also wonder, I get you support Trump, but does none of these stories and none of his behaviour give you any kind of pause? For example letting Rudy falsely smear a merited ambassador with the help of corrupt Ukrainian ex-politicians, just so.

[BmorePat87]

(01-22-2020, 09:32 AM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Honestly, I'm not sure what to actually believe.  I do have trouble accepting the reasoning of "he was just trying to launch an investigation on a political rival", as Biden has not been nominated as the candidate.

He didn't hold up the aid the two previous years. It was only after Biden announced that he was running that Trump held it up.

Also, do you have that list of the many presidents who did the same thing? 

[BmorePat87]

(01-22-2020, 08:30 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: So, reading over the remarks from yesterday I do find it interesting that the defense of Trump is that abuse of power is not an impeachable offense, but also how much the defense team lied. They really are just preying on the gullible. I can't believe how much of a disconnect from reality the actual defenders of Trump have. I would have zero issues with an acquittal of Trump is there was a good faith argument being made, but there isn't. The idea of "high crimes and misdemeanors" absolutely includes abuse of power and that they have chosen to drag the slimeball Dershowitz up there to reverse his position from 1999 is just showing how much the Republicans are reaching.

Their target audience is those that they have convinced that Joe Biden did something despite insurmountable evidence to the contrary. Those who don't understand facts and choose to ignore anything that disputes their world views.

You have to assume someone like Susan Collins will get hit hard for this. She likes to play the "I am open to listening" or "this concerns me" but then she falls in line behind McConnell. 

If the defense continues to take this route where they unequivocally lie and grandstand while not making any actual arguments and she joins with the other GOP senators in accepting it, she's going to have to justify that in her reelection campaign. 

[Belsnickel]

(01-22-2020, 10:26 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: You have to assume someone like Susan Collins will get hit hard for this. She likes to play the "I am open to listening" or "this concerns me" but then she falls in line behind McConnell. 

If the defense continues to take this route where they unequivocally lie and grandstand while not making any actual arguments and she joins with the other GOP senators in accepting it, she's going to have to justify that in her reelection campaign. 

The majority of Americans want to see a fair trial with new evidence and witnesses. Even a plurality of Republican voters (48%-44%) in the last poll I saw wanted new evidence and witnesses. I can't believe that this will spell out good news for those vulnerable GOP Senators in the chambers if they just march in step with McConnell and the White House. Only the most partisan and the naive will swallow this show trial if it ends without those things. There is zero doubt that Trump will be acquitted, but doing so without at least paying some lip service to the duty they swore to do would be a travesty.

[GMDino]

(01-22-2020, 10:38 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: The majority of Americans want to see a fair trial with new evidence and witnesses. Even a plurality of Republican voters (48%-44%) in the last poll I saw wanted new evidence and witnesses. I can't believe that this will spell out good news for those vulnerable GOP Senators in the chambers if they just march in step with McConnell and the White House. Only the most partisan and the naive will swallow this show trial if it ends without those things. There is zero doubt that Trump will be acquitted, but doing so without at least paying some lip service to the duty they swore to do would be a travesty.

Will it matter with the way districts are set up though?  Without doing any research I'd bet even the "vulnerable" have a better chance of winning that losing just due to the demographics/layout of their districts. (<-- Edit to add that was dumb...lol. I need to post after coffee. :) Not taking it down though...I'll own my mistake!)



I think some of us have too much faith in voters to do the right thing.

[BmorePat87]

(01-22-2020, 10:45 AM)GMDino Wrote: Will it matter with the way districts are set up though?  Without doing any research I'd bet even the "vulnerable" have a better chance of winning that losing just due to the demographics/layout of their districts.

I think some of us have too much faith in voters to do the right thing.

Senators have to contend with their entire state.