Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The 2019-2020 Impeachment, Trial and Acquittal of Donald John Trump

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by TopHatter View Post
    Interesting that you place so much weight on Volker and Sondland's testimony. All caps even.

    And yet, with the height of irony, you say nothing at all about the other Executive Branch witnesses that were subpoenaed to appear before Congress...and were blocked by Donald Trump.

    To say nothing of the Executive Branch documents subpoenaed by Congress...and were blocked by Donald Trump.

    Yes, truly amusing that you cackle and crow, rolling on the floor laughing about the witnesses that did defy Trump's obstruction of Congress....but don't seem bothered in the slightest about people like Mulvaney, Pompeo, Bolton, Giuliani and all the others not appearing, taking an oath to tell the truth, and clearing Trump's name.

    And then there's the complete lack of a complete transcript of Trump's "perfect" phone call.
    That's because I am a child of the enlightenment, not a conspiracy theorist. I'm genuinely sorry if this offends you.

    As for the ALL CAPS, shall I use Bold in Red instead?

    Edit to add: I see we have moved on to large font bold. Shall I try that?
    In the realm of spirit, seek clarity; in the material world, seek utility.

    Leibniz

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Parihaka View Post
      That's because I am a child of the enlightenment, not a conspiracy theorist. I'm genuinely sorry if this offends you.

      As for the ALL CAPS, shall I use Bold in Red instead?
      If it concerns you enough, absolutely.

      But that wasn't the point of what I said, was it.
      Supporting or defending Donald Trump is such an unforgivable moral failing that it calls every bit of your judgement and character into question. Nothing about you should be trusted if you can look at this man and find redeemable value

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Parihaka View Post

        Edit to add: I see we have moved on to large font bold. Shall I try that?
        If it's important enough to you, by all means.

        Interesting that you're harping on HTML formatting and not the words that were within that bracket.

        Tell me something Iain, why are you so at ease with what McConnell and Graham have said, and what it means Constitutionally?

        You haven't said a word of rebuttal, just proclamations of being a child of the enlightenment. Does "enlightenment" mean "I love Trump so much I'm willing to forgive him for literally anything"? Is that what that means?
        Supporting or defending Donald Trump is such an unforgivable moral failing that it calls every bit of your judgement and character into question. Nothing about you should be trusted if you can look at this man and find redeemable value

        Comment


        • Originally posted by TopHatter View Post
          If it's important enough to you, by all means.

          Interesting that you're harping on HTML formatting and not the words that were within that bracket.
          It's not interesting at all, I'm taking the piss.
          Originally posted by TopHatter View Post
          Tell me something Iain, why are you so at ease with what McConnell and Graham have said, and what it means Constitutionally?

          You haven't said a word of rebuttal, just proclamations of being a child of the enlightenment. Does "enlightenment" mean "I love Trump so much I'm willing to forgive him for literally anything"? Is that what that means?
          It's not a constitutional issue because the impeachment process, as numerous people have pointed out including you and Asti IIRC on my brief review of the forum, is not a court of law.
          It is a fishing expedition, looking to dig dirt on the subject, or when/if passed to Senate, the prosecutors, because of the Republican majority.

          Hence the Republicans and Trump blocking witnesses wholesale in the house.

          Hence Pelosi's current reluctance, despite the House operating under urgency, to bring it to the Senate, because she can't block any witnesses the Republicans might chose to subpoena.

          Schiff subpoena anyone? Secret witness E************A? How about Joe and Hunter? It could go on for months, they'd be shredded and Pelosi knows it. Her only hope is to keep it in her pocket, trying to conjure up new witnesses to send back to the house, to spin out the yarn.

          Of course the Republicans are not going to allow any witness who may damage the president.
          It is a political sideshow and is damaging to the Democrat party brand.
          Better to focus on how to defeat Trump in the upcoming election than to flail around trying to unseat him by other means.

          The enlightenment of course was the introduction of empirical evidence to describe the system of the world. Every westerner, no matter how thick, knows that hearsay is not admissible in a court of law.
          Despite him blocking witnesses being called, the public knows this is not a trial and there's no smoking gun been produced, just he said/she said.
          Trump, amongst his supporters, has come out looking better than he did before, and his supporters were enough in the last election to get him 304 electoral votes, with 7 faithless electors.
          Aren't you better focused on finding a quality candidate actually capable of de-throning him?
          In the realm of spirit, seek clarity; in the material world, seek utility.

          Leibniz

          Comment


          • Given the zero (or almost zero) chance that the Senate will ever vote for impeachment I must confess to having grave doubts about whether Trump's impeachment is worth the long term political damage likely to be suffered by America as a whole.

            Whatever else happens in the current partisan political climate its seems to me that the Impeachment process which was included in the US Constitution as a last option fail safe against corruption will be 'weaponized' from now on. In the first instance this will be done by right wing Republicans (BTW is there any other type now?) but once they do the Dems will probably follow.

            By 'weaponizing' impeachment I mean of course that in the event of a Democratic win at the next Presidential election calls will be made almost from inauguration day plus 1 to 'impeach' the President on whatever flimsy excuse can be found, partly by way of 'revenge' of course but also out of sheer political expediency. After a couple more terms 'Impeachment' could well become the de rigueur response of the losing side whenever they have the numbers in Congress. It's hard to think of a worse possible outcome in terms of effective and open governance for the United States since the mere threat of impeachment will suck the air out of any other work being done by either the elected houses or the Presidency.
            Last edited by Monash; 30 Dec 19,, 00:57.
            If you are emotionally invested in 'believing' something is true you have lost the ability to tell if it is true.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Monash View Post
              Given the zero (or almost zero) chance that the Senate will ever vote for impeachment I must confess to having grave doubts about whether Trump's impeachment is worth the long term political damage likely to be suffered by America as a whole.

              Whatever else happens in the current partisan political climate its seems to me that the Impeachment process which was included in the US Constitution as a last option fail safe against corruption will be 'weaponized' from now on. In the first instance this will be done by right wing Republicans (BTW is there any other type now?) but once they do the Dems will probably follow.

              By 'weaponizing' impeachment I mean of course that in the event of a Democratic win at the next Presidential election calls will be made almost from inauguration day plus 1 to 'impeach' the President on whatever flimsy excuse can be found, partly by way of 'revenge' of course but also out of sheer political expediency. After a couple more terms 'Impeachment' could well become the de rigueur response of the losing side whenever they have the numbers in Congress. It's hard to think of a worse possible outcome in terms of effective and open governance for the United States since the mere threat of impeachment will suck the air out of any other work being done by either the elected houses or the Presidency.
              Yes indeed
              In the realm of spirit, seek clarity; in the material world, seek utility.

              Leibniz

              Comment


              • Originally posted by TopHatter View Post
                And then there's the complete lack of a complete transcript of Trump's "perfect" phone call.
                Redacted ? why

                How many times have i heard 'just read the transcript' and you will know there is nothing to see here.

                Yet, it appears adequate given how much has been made of it.

                Shouldn't the democrats be pushing for more to be released or the full version
                Last edited by Double Edge; 30 Dec 19,, 01:16.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Parihaka View Post
                  It's not interesting at all, I'm taking the piss.
                  How nice :-)

                  Originally posted by Parihaka View Post
                  t's not a constitutional issue because the impeachment process, as numerous people have pointed out including you and Asti IIRC on my brief review of the forum, is not a court of law.

                  It is a fishing expedition, looking to dig dirt on the subject, or when/if passed to Senate, the prosecutors, because of the Republican majority.
                  Hence the Republicans and Trump blocking witnesses wholesale in the house.
                  So the GOP and Trump are Constitutionally able to decide what is valid and what is not, what is a fishing expedition, and what is not, when they can obey Congressional subpoenas and when they don't have to? Interesting theory, though completely in violation of the US Constitution.

                  Yes, they're so confident and secure that Trump had a "perfect" phone call with Ukraine that they're unwilling to cooperate in the most microscopic way, up to and including a verbatim transcript of that aforementioned "perfect" phone.

                  Give. Me. A. Fucking. Break.

                  Originally posted by Parihaka View Post
                  Hence Pelosi's current reluctance, despite the House operating under urgency, to bring it to the Senate, because she can't block any witnesses the Republicans might chose to subpoena.

                  Schiff subpoena anyone? Secret witness E************A? How about Joe and Hunter? It could go on for months, they'd be shredded and Pelosi knows it. Her only hope is to keep it in her pocket, trying to conjure up new witnesses to send back to the house, to spin out the yarn.
                  LOL yeah and these bullshit talking points have already been demolished in previous responses. Even Bolded some of them for you. But Cognitive Dissonance sure is a pitiless bitch isn't she. Or you're just taking the piss again.

                  Originally posted by Parihaka View Post
                  Of course the Republicans are not going to allow any witness who may damage the president.
                  Of course the Constitution doesn't give them that kind of chickenshit option. That's called Obstruction of Justice. Or more precisely Contempt of Congress.

                  But, you do admit a pretty damning point: The witnesses that are being held back can damage Trump. And we can't have that, now can we.

                  Originally posted by Parihaka View Post
                  Better to focus on how to defeat Trump in the upcoming election than to flail around trying to unseat him by other means.
                  Maybe the focus is on upholding the Constitution, and as Lindsay Graham once said: "Impeachment is about cleansing the office. Impeachment is about restoring honor and integrity to the office.

                  Originally posted by Parihaka View Post
                  The enlightenment of course was the introduction of empirical evidence to describe the system of the world. Every westerner, no matter how thick, knows that hearsay is not admissible in a court of law.
                  Wait, you've already acknowledged that the impeachment process is not a court of law...so why the righteous indignation about hearsay not being admissible in a court of law?

                  Oh and speaking of heresay not being admissible in a court of law? You might want to check on that assertion again. Because it's wrong.

                  Originally posted by Parihaka View Post
                  Despite him blocking witnesses being called, the public knows this is not a trial and there's no smoking gun been produced, just he said/she said.
                  The two parts of that sentence are not compatible with each other. I think you mean BECAUSE of Trump blocking witnesses, ALL the public is ABLE to know is what those witnesses have testified. And every one of them have said the exact same thing.

                  And the people claiming that Trump did nothing wrong won't testify without a court order (which would be appealed up to the Supreme Court if they didn't get the ruling they wanted).

                  Interesting contrast there...

                  Originally posted by Parihaka View Post
                  Trump, amongst his supporters, has come out looking better than he did before, and his supporters were enough in the last election to get him 304 electoral votes, with 7 faithless electors.
                  That says some really bad things about his supporters. Especially what they're willing to swallow from that man.

                  Originally posted by Parihaka View Post
                  Aren't you better focused on finding a quality candidate actually capable of de-throning him?
                  Considering that the few Republicans that still have the balls to challenge him don't stand a chance against the might of the Trump's Kool-Aid Man hold on the RNC....I don't know that I can do all that much. Sort of a huge shit sandwich, really.
                  Supporting or defending Donald Trump is such an unforgivable moral failing that it calls every bit of your judgement and character into question. Nothing about you should be trusted if you can look at this man and find redeemable value

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Monash View Post
                    Given the zero (or almost zero) chance that the Senate will ever vote for impeachment I must confess to having grave doubts about whether Trump's impeachment is worth the long term political damage likely to be suffered by America as a whole.

                    Whatever else happens in the current partisan political climate its seems to me that the Impeachment process which was included in the US Constitution as a last option fail safe against corruption will be 'weaponized' from now on. In the first instance this will be done by right wing Republicans (BTW is there any other type now?) but once they do the Dems will probably follow.

                    By 'weaponizing' impeachment I mean of course that in the event of a Democratic win at the next Presidential election calls will be made almost from inauguration day plus 1 to 'impeach' the President on whatever flimsy excuse can be found, partly by way of 'revenge' of course but also out of sheer political expediency. After a couple more terms 'Impeachment' could well become the de rigueur response of the losing side whenever they have the numbers in Congress. It's hard to think of a worse possible outcome in terms of effective and open governance for the United States since the mere threat of impeachment will suck the air out of any other work being done by either the elected houses or the Presidency.
                    heh . deja vu

                    See what i mean astralis



                    That's how it goes down in parliamentary democracies

                    They just get rolled

                    No impeachment

                    No Ukraine
                    Last edited by Double Edge; 30 Dec 19,, 01:26.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Double Edge View Post
                      Redacted ? why
                      Why do you think DE? Take a look at Trump's complete obstruction of Congressional subpoenas. What possible reason could Trump have for blocking anything and everything that he possibly can?

                      Originally posted by Double Edge View Post
                      How many times have i heard 'just read the transcript' and you will know there is nothing to see here.
                      Because Trump's track record of telling the truth is so reliable?

                      Originally posted by Double Edge View Post
                      Yet, it appears adequate given how much has been made of it.
                      For fuck's sake.... *facepalm* Really? Are...are you serious? Well then, as long as it appears that way, we can all rest assured that it IS that way.

                      Shouldn't the democrats be pushing for more to be released or the full version[/QUOTE]
                      And given Trump's history of complying with Congressional subpoenas, what do you think the result will be?
                      Supporting or defending Donald Trump is such an unforgivable moral failing that it calls every bit of your judgement and character into question. Nothing about you should be trusted if you can look at this man and find redeemable value

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by TopHatter View Post
                        Why do you think DE? Take a look at Trump's complete obstruction of Congressional subpoenas. What possible reason could Trump have for blocking anything and everything that he possibly can?

                        Because Trump's track record of telling the truth is so reliable?


                        For fuck's sake.... *facepalm* Really? Are...are you serious? Well then, as long as it appears that way, we can all rest assured that it IS that way.

                        Shouldn't the democrats be pushing for more to be released or the full version
                        And given Trump's history of complying with Congressional subpoenas, what do you think the result will be?
                        If this case is of such national importance how is it he can't be made to comply ?

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Double Edge View Post
                          If this case is of such national importance how is it he can't be made to comply ?
                          Dunno man, it's a total fucking mystery.

                          jfc....
                          Supporting or defending Donald Trump is such an unforgivable moral failing that it calls every bit of your judgement and character into question. Nothing about you should be trusted if you can look at this man and find redeemable value

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by TopHatter View Post
                            How nice :-)


                            So the GOP and Trump are Constitutionally able to decide what is valid and what is not, what is a fishing expedition, and what is not, when they can obey Congressional subpoenas and when they don't have to? Interesting theory, though completely in violation of the US Constitution.

                            Yes, they're so confident and secure that Trump had a "perfect" phone call with Ukraine that they're unwilling to cooperate in the most microscopic way, up to and including a verbatim transcript of that aforementioned "perfect" phone.

                            Give. Me. A. Fucking. Break.


                            LOL yeah and these bullshit talking points have already been demolished in previous responses. Even Bolded some of them for you. But Cognitive Dissonance sure is a pitiless bitch isn't she. Or you're just taking the piss again.

                            Of course the Constitution doesn't give them that kind of chickenshit option. That's called Obstruction of Justice. Or more precisely Contempt of Congress.

                            But, you do admit a pretty damning point: The witnesses that are being held back can damage Trump. And we can't have that, now can we.


                            Maybe the focus is on upholding the Constitution, and as Lindsay Graham once said: "Impeachment is about cleansing the office. Impeachment is about restoring honor and integrity to the office.”


                            Wait, you've already acknowledged that the impeachment process is not a court of law...so why the righteous indignation about hearsay not being admissible in a court of law?

                            Oh and speaking of heresay not being admissible in a court of law? You might want to check on that assertion again. Because it's wrong.


                            The two parts of that sentence are not compatible with each other. I think you mean BECAUSE of Trump blocking witnesses, ALL the public is ABLE to know is what those witnesses have testified. And every one of them have said the exact same thing.

                            And the people claiming that Trump did nothing wrong won't testify without a court order (which would be appealed up to the Supreme Court if they didn't get the ruling they wanted).

                            Interesting contrast there...


                            That says some really bad things about his supporters. Especially what they're willing to swallow from that man.



                            Considering that the few Republicans that still have the balls to challenge him don't stand a chance against the might of the Trump's Kool-Aid Man hold on the RNC....I don't know that I can do all that much. Sort of a huge shit sandwich, really.
                            Okay Joe, I shall desist from poking you in the eye. When you've found a mechanism for removing Trump from office, get back to me.
                            In the realm of spirit, seek clarity; in the material world, seek utility.

                            Leibniz

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Double Edge View Post
                              If this case is of such national importance how is it he can't be made to comply ?
                              I've often wondered why republics require such power invested in a president. All the anglosphere parliaments seem perfectly happy with a figurehead to sign the odd bit of paper and open supermarkets, but all the republics want to invest as much power as possible in one person. They haven't produced a stellar line-up. Even my current smiley-face beloved leader is still streets ahead of any president currently in office.
                              In the realm of spirit, seek clarity; in the material world, seek utility.

                              Leibniz

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Parihaka View Post
                                Okay Joe, I shall desist from poking you in the eye. When you've found a mechanism for removing Trump from office, get back to me.
                                Is that what you've been doing this whole time? Just poking people? Taking the piss? Seriously?
                                Supporting or defending Donald Trump is such an unforgivable moral failing that it calls every bit of your judgement and character into question. Nothing about you should be trusted if you can look at this man and find redeemable value

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X