Impeachment Hearings

[GMDino]

(01-22-2020, 10:47 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Senators have to contend with their entire state. 

Jebus...I so in the mode of thinking that everything is rigged in elections locally.  Sorry.  That was dumb.

I'll rephrase:  How many actually lose their seats from election to election?

[*michaelsean*]

(01-22-2020, 10:00 AM)GMDino Wrote:





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.

Obviously I have been wrong about Trump winning the nomination and then again the election, but it's hard to believe he won't have a net loss of voters.  

[GMDino]

(01-22-2020, 10:58 AM)michaelsean Wrote: Obviously I have been wrong about Trump winning the nomination and then again the election, but it's hard to believe he won't have a net loss of voters.  

Honestly not one Trump voter I know has said they changed their mind.  Not one.

Now that's a small sample, and one very good friend may vote against him depending on who the Democratic candidate is, but the rest see absolutely nothing wrong with him.  Even IF they say they "wish he wouldn't tweet like he does" they think he fulfilled all his campaign promises, he is solely responsible for the good economy and will get rid of abortion and force students to pray in school again.  I'm not even kidding.

[hollodero]

(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. 

Yeah I guess McConnell did her a solid. In allowing her to take responsibility for some changes in the process. And probably by putting out his initial suggestion in the first place, so Collins can come in as the hero that forced said changes.

This is a clever man, that McConnell. I'm afraid no one is a match to Mitch.

[GMDino]

In all honesty someone in a debate could just say "Trump was withholding evidence and obstructing the investigation" and he would agree and say it was very smart to do.

In an incredible exchange at Davos, @realdonaldtrump admits he is comfortable with the status of the impeachment trial because the White House is withholding evidence. "Honestly, we have all the material. They don't have the material." As always, he says the quiet part out loud. pic.twitter.com/Gk3h1QZyAi

— Justin Hendrix (@justinhendrix) January 22, 2020

 

[BmorePat87]

Schiff opens arguments by quoting Hamilton in a letter to Washington talking about the type of person who would be a danger to the Republic:

Quote:When a man unprincipled in private life desperate in his fortune, bold in his temper, possessed of considerable talents, having the advantage of military habits—despotic in his ordinary demeanour—known to have scoffed in private at the principles of liberty—when such a man is seen to mount the hobby horse of popularity—to join in the cry of danger to liberty—to take every opportunity of embarrassing the General Government & bringing it under suspicion—to flatter and fall in with all the non sense of the zealots of the day—It may justly be suspected that his object is to throw things into confusion that he may “ride the storm and direct the whirlwind

[GMDino]

(01-22-2020, 03:13 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Schiff opens arguments by quoting Hamilton in a letter to Washington talking about the type of person who would be a danger to the Republic:

Yeah but you wait! That "Trump, the Musical" is gonna be the greatest musical ever.  Best attended too!  Only without any of those "theater guys" (you know what I mean).  And they won't say bad things about Pence either!  

[Goalpost]

Said Romney after day 1. When everything is an outrage, there is no outrage.

[*michaelsean*]

(01-22-2020, 03:33 PM)Goalpost Wrote: Said Romney after day 1. When everything is an outrage, there is no outrage.

Yeah I heard a cut of Schiff talking about Trump asking Russia to get Hill's emails.  I'm pretty sure everyone knew that was a joke.

[GMDino]

(01-22-2020, 04:32 PM)michaelsean Wrote: Yeah I heard a cut of Schiff talking about Trump asking Russia to get Hill's emails.  I'm pretty sure everyone knew that was a joke.

Oh, sure.  DJT is *well known* for his sense of humor.   

[GMDino]

Really wish the cameras could show the faces of the Senators.  I'd like to know if they are paying attention at all.

[Dill]

(01-22-2020, 03:13 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Schiff opens arguments by quoting Hamilton in a letter to Washington talking about the type of person who would be a danger to the Republic:

I don't see Trump in that description.  He is not a military man.

[GMDino]

(01-22-2020, 03:33 PM)Goalpost Wrote: Said Romney after day 1. When everything is an outrage, there is no outrage.

Romney's a milksop. He's always "upset" about things but never will do anything about them.

[Dill]

(01-22-2020, 04:32 PM)michaelsean Wrote: Yeah I heard a cut of Schiff talking about Trump asking Russia to get Hill's emails.  I'm pretty sure everyone knew that was a joke.

I'm pretty sure it was a joke, but no one told the Russians, who immediately took him up on the suggestion.

That's why jokes of presidential candidates are not to be viewed like jokes between guys on a message board.

It is an especially bad joke when paired with his later call to China to investigate the Bidens, which definitely was not a joke.

[Dill]

(01-22-2020, 11:03 AM)GMDino Wrote: Honestly not one Trump voter I know has said they changed their mind.  Not one.

Now that's a small sample, and one very good friend may vote against him depending on who the Democratic candidate is, but the rest see absolutely nothing wrong with him.  Even IF they say they "wish he wouldn't tweet like he does" they think he fulfilled all his campaign promises, he is solely responsible for the good economy and will get rid of abortion and force students to pray in school again.  I'm not even kidding.

Baker was a Trump voter who changed his mind.

I don't think Schiff et al. are addressing the 39-41% of Trump's base who don't want the law applied to Trump.

Given that 51% of the country now wants him removed from office, they are after a percentage of the 8% or so "moveable"s, who include Trump defenders-but-not-supporters.  Some are beginning to admit that, in abusing the power of his office to disrupt US foreign policy and then block all evidence that he can, he is almost as bad as Hillary.

[BmorePat87]

I listened to Schiff for about an hour. Pretty solid. Hard to contest the facts.

[GMDino]

(01-22-2020, 05:31 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: I listened to Schiff for about an hour. Pretty solid. Hard to contest the facts.

Agree.  I've had it on all morning at work, listening when I can.  He's doing a good job.  It's just sad that it doesn't matter because Republican Senators just don't care.

[Dill]

(01-22-2020, 05:31 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: I listened to Schiff for about an hour. Pretty solid. Hard to contest the facts.

Republicans now have to come together and show the world that they will help the Prez withhold evidence and Barr (pun intended) witnesses.

This is their statement that he is at once outside and above the law, so Democrats cannot use the law to undo an election.

Anyway, the logic is clear-- if the Squad wanted to impeach Trump on day one, then legally there is no way Trump could have broken the law by withholding aid from the Ukraine, no matter what Schiff and Nadler say.

"Hate" is not grounds for impeachment.

[HarleyDog]

(01-22-2020, 05:57 PM)Dill Wrote: Republicans now have to come together and show the world that they will help the Prez withhold evidence and Barr (pun intended) witnesses.

This is their statement that he is at once outside and above the law, so Democrats cannot use the law to undo an election.

Anyway, the logic is clear-- if the Squad wanted to impeach Trump on day one, then legally there is no way Trump could have broken the law by withholding aid from the Ukraine, no matter what Schiff and Nadler say. "Hate" is not grounds for impeachment.

Had the Dems ran a fair proceeding in the congressional hearings, there's a chance we wouldn't be talking about this in the senate. I find it very odd to hear the left complain about the right being corrupt.

[Vas Deferens]

(01-22-2020, 06:01 PM)HarleyDog Wrote: Had the Dems ran a fair proceeding in the congressional hearings, there's a chance we wouldn't be talking about this in the senate. I find it very odd to hear the left complain about the right being corrupt.

What was unfair about the house proceedings?

Honest question