Chat Forum
It is currently Sun Dec 15, 2019 5:46 pm

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 105250 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 2572, 2573, 2574, 2575, 2576, 2577, 2578 ... 2632  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Nov 13, 2019 5:05 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 11, 2015 12:51 pm
Posts: 16632
Seneca of the Night wrote:
Downer one step closer to being dragged through DC in chains: https://amp.theaustralian.com.au/world/ ... ssion=true

Offer him up Aussies.

Specifically, what crime did he commit?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 13, 2019 5:14 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 9066
Location: Indiana
Santa wrote:
Seneca of the Night wrote:
Santa wrote:
Flyin Ryan wrote:
Santa wrote:
What we currently have is the Democrats pursuing a shonky impeachment case, without any kind of bipartisan support, knowing full well that it will most likely die in the Senate. It's a political stunt and nothing more.


Well of course, think even the supporters of this would agree with most of that.

The only chance the Senate would ever actually convict Trump of impeachment is if they take a vote as a lame duck body after November 3rd of next year and Trump lost re-election, and therefore the GOP have no commitment to him. And then Mike Pence is President for a month or two.

Donald Trump is a horrible president. But the notion that the Republican and Democratic parties at present would put aside their partisan differences, and judge the president regardless of party based on actual crimes committed or merely perceived as they did with Nixon in the 1970s is sheer lunacy. The Republicans are not going to throw their guy under the bus and the Democrats won't either.

The only conviction of impeachment that would occur in modern times is Andrew Johnson's circumstances in 1868 where he was the president from one party and the other party held more than 2/3rds of the Senate, or if some independent or 3rd party individual was elected president, and both the Republicans and Democrats hated him/her.


The point is impeachment is a serious matter that the Democrats have trivialised over the last 3 years and continue to do right now. They are turning it into a thing that the Congressional majority just does rather than a serious matter to remove a President that, by popular opinion, is not worthy to lead the country. This is precisely what Hamilton did not want to happen.


It's even more serious than that. They basically refused to accept the result of the election, and have launched attempt after attempt to remove him from office by means outside the electoral process. I don't seen any particular reason why the other side should bother now either.


I agree, though the GOP will do well to manufacture a Special Counsel investigation any time soon. That has been a real high water mark in terms of political shenanigans.


Impeachment talk since Clinton has come up with every president since. It's really devalued what should be an incredibly serious thing. But the partisan nature means that the only people that ever get removed are federal judges. There have been 5 of those post-World War II, 3 in the 1980s, 1 in 2009, and 1 in 2010.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 13, 2019 5:19 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 11, 2015 12:51 pm
Posts: 16632
Flyin Ryan wrote:
Santa wrote:
BokJock wrote:
If the POTUS does things that are impeach-worthy then yeah go for it.

Ps. Even if you somehow think this is frivolous, it is hardly new - there was a president who went through this shit for getting a blowjob about 25 years ago

and Senator "Heaven to Betsy" Graham was very vocal about it back then


What we currently have is the Democrats pursuing a shonky impeachment case, without any kind of bipartisan support, knowing full well that it will most likely die in the Senate. It's a political stunt and nothing more.


Well of course, think even the supporters of this would agree with most of that.

The only chance the Senate would ever actually convict Trump of impeachment is if they take a vote as a lame duck body after November 3rd of next year and Trump lost re-election, and therefore the GOP have no commitment to him. And then Mike Pence is President for a month or two.

Donald Trump is a horrible president. But the notion that the Republican and Democratic parties at present would put aside their partisan differences, and judge the president regardless of party based on actual crimes committed or merely perceived as they did with Nixon in the 1970s is sheer lunacy. The Republicans are not going to throw their guy under the bus and the Democrats won't either.

The only conviction of impeachment that would occur in modern times is Andrew Johnson's circumstances in 1868 where he was the president from one party and the other party held more than 2/3rds of the Senate, or if some independent or 3rd party individual was elected president, and both the Republicans and Democrats hated him/her.

The problem for the GOP is even if they agreed it’s impeachable and convicted him. What then? Trump just shuffles off quietly and The party unites behind POTUS Pence? No.....


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 13, 2019 5:21 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 9066
Location: Indiana
paddyor wrote:
Flyin Ryan wrote:
Santa wrote:
BokJock wrote:
If the POTUS does things that are impeach-worthy then yeah go for it.

Ps. Even if you somehow think this is frivolous, it is hardly new - there was a president who went through this shit for getting a blowjob about 25 years ago

and Senator "Heaven to Betsy" Graham was very vocal about it back then


What we currently have is the Democrats pursuing a shonky impeachment case, without any kind of bipartisan support, knowing full well that it will most likely die in the Senate. It's a political stunt and nothing more.


Well of course, think even the supporters of this would agree with most of that.

The only chance the Senate would ever actually convict Trump of impeachment is if they take a vote as a lame duck body after November 3rd of next year and Trump lost re-election, and therefore the GOP have no commitment to him. And then Mike Pence is President for a month or two.

Donald Trump is a horrible president. But the notion that the Republican and Democratic parties at present would put aside their partisan differences, and judge the president regardless of party based on actual crimes committed or merely perceived as they did with Nixon in the 1970s is sheer lunacy. The Republicans are not going to throw their guy under the bus and the Democrats won't either.

The only conviction of impeachment that would occur in modern times is Andrew Johnson's circumstances in 1868 where he was the president from one party and the other party held more than 2/3rds of the Senate, or if some independent or 3rd party individual was elected president, and both the Republicans and Democrats hated him/her.

The problem for the GOP is even if they agreed it’s impeachable and convicted him. What then? Trump just shuffles off quietly and The party unites behind POTUS Pence? No.....


The party would split in two. Trump would cry betrayal and a lot of Republican voters would agree with that take. I would not want to be a Republican in the House or Senate that voted against Trump in this impeachment trial, and THEN face a primary.

I do wonder what the party looks like post-Trump, be it December 2020 or the 2024 primaries. I don't think it's going to be a Mike Pence-led party although Pence is very politically ambitious and I will bet money on him running in 2024 as "Trump's heir", at least in the primaries. The "Trump's heir" platform is going to be very crowded though and a lot of people looking for it.

Something I've had in the back of mind however, and there has been a little talk about it, is whether Trump chooses to replace Pence on the 2020 ticket, with the potential replacement being Nikki Haley. The delegates have their hands tied on their presidential vote. None of the delegates are committed on a VP vote in contrast. Suddenly these staged national conventions would have a meaningful vote on the national ticket for the first time since 1980. It'd be the ultimate attention grabber, which makes it a very Trump thing to do.


Last edited by Flyin Ryan on Wed Nov 13, 2019 5:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 13, 2019 5:24 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2012 11:30 am
Posts: 4085
Flyin Ryan wrote:

The party would split in two. Trump would cry betrayal and a lot of Republican voters would agree with that take. I would not want to be a Republican in the House or Senate that voted against Trump in this impeachment trial, and THEN face a primary.


this.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 13, 2019 5:34 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:56 pm
Posts: 9194
No sane person would vote to impeach Trump on the facts as currently known.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 13, 2019 5:36 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 9066
Location: Indiana
Santa wrote:
No sane person would vote to impeach Trump on the facts as currently known.


Impeachment votes are not based on sanity. They're based on what letter is after your name on the ballot.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 13, 2019 5:43 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 34073
Flyin Ryan wrote:
Santa wrote:
No sane person would vote to impeach Trump on the facts as currently known.


Impeachment votes are not based on sanity. They're based on what letter is after your name on the ballot.


Schiff is patently insane. He might be a Democrat also, but I'd say the main motivating driver in his life at the moment is his insanity.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 13, 2019 5:44 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2012 11:30 am
Posts: 4085
Seneca of the Night wrote:
Flyin Ryan wrote:
Santa wrote:
No sane person would vote to impeach Trump on the facts as currently known.


Impeachment votes are not based on sanity. They're based on what letter is after your name on the ballot.


Schiff is patently insane. He might be a Democrat also, but I'd say the main motivating driver in his life at the moment is his insanity.


silly


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 13, 2019 5:49 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2014 9:01 am
Posts: 7097
BokJock wrote:
Flyin Ryan wrote:

The party would split in two. Trump would cry betrayal and a lot of Republican voters would agree with that take. I would not want to be a Republican in the House or Senate that voted against Trump in this impeachment trial, and THEN face a primary.


this.


What do they plan on doing when Trump gets voted out, runs out of terms or the fat bastard drops dead of a heart attack? Are they going to scour the Tea Party for another crazy person who's barely a Republican, appoint Ivanka who's a crazy person who's barely a person, scour the airways for a well known face, or try and get back to being a voice for conservatism?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 13, 2019 5:54 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2012 11:30 am
Posts: 4085
piquant wrote:
BokJock wrote:
Flyin Ryan wrote:

The party would split in two. Trump would cry betrayal and a lot of Republican voters would agree with that take. I would not want to be a Republican in the House or Senate that voted against Trump in this impeachment trial, and THEN face a primary.


this.


What do they plan on doing when Trump gets voted out, runs out of terms or the fat bastard drops dead of a heart attack? Are they going to scour the Tea Party for another crazy person who's barely a Republican, appoint Ivanka who's a crazy person who's barely a person, scour the airways for a well known face, or try and get back to being a voice for conservatism?


Forget it ever happened.

Like the end of It Chapter 1


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 13, 2019 5:55 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2012 11:30 am
Posts: 4085
Bill Taylor has a good voice, he could be a baseball commentator


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 13, 2019 6:03 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 34073
piquant wrote:
BokJock wrote:
Flyin Ryan wrote:

The party would split in two. Trump would cry betrayal and a lot of Republican voters would agree with that take. I would not want to be a Republican in the House or Senate that voted against Trump in this impeachment trial, and THEN face a primary.


this.


What do they plan on doing when Trump gets voted out, runs out of terms or the fat bastard drops dead of a heart attack? Are they going to scour the Tea Party for another crazy person who's barely a Republican, appoint Ivanka who's a crazy person who's barely a person, scour the airways for a well known face, or try and get back to being a voice for conservatism?


A voice for conservatism … so ban all immigration, stop wars for Israel and rescind gay marriage. Be careful what you wish for.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 13, 2019 6:05 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 9066
Location: Indiana
piquant wrote:
BokJock wrote:
Flyin Ryan wrote:

The party would split in two. Trump would cry betrayal and a lot of Republican voters would agree with that take. I would not want to be a Republican in the House or Senate that voted against Trump in this impeachment trial, and THEN face a primary.


this.


What do they plan on doing when Trump gets voted out, runs out of terms or the fat bastard drops dead of a heart attack? Are they going to scour the Tea Party for another crazy person who's barely a Republican, appoint Ivanka who's a crazy person who's barely a person, scour the airways for a well known face, or try and get back to being a voice for conservatism?


Well the Democrats still haven't sorted themselves out post-Obama and the Republicans couldn't find leadership to unite the party from the '06 midterms to Trump sometime in late '16. There were Republicans that hated McCain, hated Romney, a good-sized contingent hated John Boehner and Paul Ryan, and McConnell has his fair share of enemies although he's done better at insulating himself. It's pretty common actually in U.S. politics for the party out of power to be leaderless.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 13, 2019 6:27 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 5912
What nobody has attempted to do here is suggest alternatives regards what the Dems are supposed to do in this case. Sit on their hands and be tossed out of office because of a failure to uphold their duties?

So they run an impeachment inquiry, which they should do given the circumstances, there doesn't seem to be any option there. I'm wondering though what options they have has a result of the inquiry. Does it have to be impeachment and attempting removal from office though the Senate trial? Could they for instance have a vote of censure?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 13, 2019 6:27 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 15835
I am absolutely astonished that people who consider themselves to be part of (nay, not just part of, but leaders at the top level of) the Intelligentsia (I'm looking at you, Sen and Santa) , can think that the impeachment proceedings are are anything other than entirely necessary to try to reign in an out-of-control President who behaves as if he is completely free to do as he likes with no regard to the restrictions of his office.

Mueller's report, of which Trump famously said "My Presidency is fcuked" turned out to be a damp squib in which Mueller passed the buck to a Congress which was (at the time) unable to take any action, and that, to me was the start of the emboldening of Trump.

But did Trump learn from it? Well, I suppose he did: he learned that he could do anything he liked without worrying about the consequences. Seriously, withholding aid which had already been authorized in order to coerce a foreign Government into smearing a political rival would be bad enough; the fact that he did it in front of dozens of witnesses just shows how little he cared about the ability of the other branches of the executive, or any oaths of office.

I'll tell you this: if he gets away with it, he will only get worse.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 13, 2019 6:32 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 15835
Flockwitt wrote:
What nobody has attempted to do here is suggest alternatives regards what the Dems are supposed to do in this case. Sit on their hands and be tossed out of office because of a failure to uphold their duties?

So they run an impeachment inquiry, which they should do given the circumstances, there doesn't seem to be any option there. I'm wondering though what options they have has a result of the inquiry. Does it have to be impeachment and attempting removal from office though the Senate trial? Could they for instance have a vote of censure?

Precisely.

Actually, I think the absolute worst thing for the Dems would be for Trump to be removed and a reasonably personable alternative found in the GOP ranks.

At least the shitshow of Dems nomination race has the probability of running against Trump when the time comes.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 13, 2019 6:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 10531
Location: The centre of The Horrendous Space Kablooie!
In non-Presidency related Trump news, his Scottish golf club has been ordered to pay the Court costs of his windmill tilting. £225,000 apparently.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 13, 2019 6:36 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:56 pm
Posts: 9194
Flockwitt wrote:
What nobody has attempted to do here is suggest alternatives regards what the Dems are supposed to do in this case. Sit on their hands and be tossed out of office because of a failure to uphold their duties?

So they run an impeachment inquiry, which they should do given the circumstances, there doesn't seem to be any option there. I'm wondering though what options they have has a result of the inquiry. Does it have to be impeachment and attempting removal from office though the Senate trial? Could they for instance have a vote of censure?


Nothing. This is a nothing situation where nothing actually happened. However, they set this whole thing up and now they have to live with it. That they have undermined their weak current position by being utterly hysterical for the last three years hasn't helped. They are a rabble.

What should they have done?
1. Said fudge it we f**ked the last election lets do some proper work rather than spend all our time scheming to bring Trump down
2. Killed the Squad, burned their bodies and sown salt so nothing would ever grow there again
3. Stop being such a woke bunch of stupid SJW plum and actually listen

However their behaviour hasn't really been a choice. It is the inevitable result of the way they think and the kinds of people they have brought into their organisation.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 13, 2019 6:43 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2019 2:59 pm
Posts: 544
Santa wrote:
Flockwitt wrote:
What nobody has attempted to do here is suggest alternatives regards what the Dems are supposed to do in this case. Sit on their hands and be tossed out of office because of a failure to uphold their duties?

So they run an impeachment inquiry, which they should do given the circumstances, there doesn't seem to be any option there. I'm wondering though what options they have has a result of the inquiry. Does it have to be impeachment and attempting removal from office though the Senate trial? Could they for instance have a vote of censure?


Nothing. This is a nothing situation where nothing actually happened. However, they set this whole thing up and now they have to live with it. That they have undermined their weak current position by being utterly hysterical for the last three years hasn't helped. They are a rabble.


Didn't he allegedly bribe Ukrainian officials to investigate the Bidens?

And isn't bribery one of the explicit heads of impeachment in their constitution? "The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors."

It seems somewhat circular to claim he shouldn't be impeached because he didn't do it, when this is the mechanism intended to find out if he did.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 13, 2019 6:47 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 34073
Rinkals wrote:
I am absolutely astonished that people who consider themselves to be part of (nay, not just part of, but leaders at the top level of) the Intelligentsia (I'm looking at you, Sen and Santa) .


Leave Santa out of this pal. It's only me who is a self-appointed leader of The Intelligentsia. Santa's status has been tested, approved and stamped by the exalted and immortal elites who for a thousand years have determined who gets to comport themselves in such fashion.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 13, 2019 6:48 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2019 2:59 pm
Posts: 544
Maybe the argument is that it isn't bribery, because he wasn't offering anything corruptly, but instead withholding something corruptly.

That'd be extortion, and extortion isn't explicitly mentioned in the constitution.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 13, 2019 6:51 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 34073
6.Jones wrote:
Santa wrote:
Flockwitt wrote:
What nobody has attempted to do here is suggest alternatives regards what the Dems are supposed to do in this case. Sit on their hands and be tossed out of office because of a failure to uphold their duties?

So they run an impeachment inquiry, which they should do given the circumstances, there doesn't seem to be any option there. I'm wondering though what options they have has a result of the inquiry. Does it have to be impeachment and attempting removal from office though the Senate trial? Could they for instance have a vote of censure?


Nothing. This is a nothing situation where nothing actually happened. However, they set this whole thing up and now they have to live with it. That they have undermined their weak current position by being utterly hysterical for the last three years hasn't helped. They are a rabble.


Didn't he allegedly bribe Ukrainian officials to investigate the Bidens?

And isn't bribery one of the explicit heads of impeachment in their constitution? "The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors."

It seems somewhat circular to claim he shouldn't be impeached because he didn't do it, when this is the mechanism intended to find out if he did.


I suppose he did allegedly bribe the Ukrainian officials, give that it was allegedly aid to the Ukraine govt, which may as well have been the Ukrainian officials, given the level of corruption in that country, and then of course that money would have probably found its way to the Bidens, given they were in receipt of corrupt Ukrainian money. So you could say Trump was trying to bribe the Bidens to investigate the Bidens. Sounds good enough for impeachment to me.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 13, 2019 6:53 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 34073
6.Jones wrote:
Maybe the argument is that it isn't bribery, because he wasn't offering anything corruptly, but instead withholding something corruptly.

That'd be extortion, and extortion isn't explicitly mentioned in the constitution.


So he was threatening to extort the Bidens to investigate the Biden's bribes.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 13, 2019 6:57 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2019 2:59 pm
Posts: 544
Seneca of the Night wrote:
6.Jones wrote:
Santa wrote:
Flockwitt wrote:
What nobody has attempted to do here is suggest alternatives regards what the Dems are supposed to do in this case. Sit on their hands and be tossed out of office because of a failure to uphold their duties?

So they run an impeachment inquiry, which they should do given the circumstances, there doesn't seem to be any option there. I'm wondering though what options they have has a result of the inquiry. Does it have to be impeachment and attempting removal from office though the Senate trial? Could they for instance have a vote of censure?


Nothing. This is a nothing situation where nothing actually happened. However, they set this whole thing up and now they have to live with it. That they have undermined their weak current position by being utterly hysterical for the last three years hasn't helped. They are a rabble.


Didn't he allegedly bribe Ukrainian officials to investigate the Bidens?

And isn't bribery one of the explicit heads of impeachment in their constitution? "The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors."

It seems somewhat circular to claim he shouldn't be impeached because he didn't do it, when this is the mechanism intended to find out if he did.


I suppose he did allegedly bribe the Ukrainian officials, give that it was allegedly aid to the Ukraine govt, which may as well have been the Ukrainian officials, given the level of corruption in that country, and then of course that money would have probably found its way to the Bidens, given they were in receipt of corrupt Ukrainian money. So you could say Trump was trying to bribe the Bidens to investigate the Bidens. Sounds good enough for impeachment to me.


It does. We have to find out. This is the way.

Impeachment, I mean. Not the Planet Rugby forum.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 13, 2019 6:57 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 15835
Seneca of the Night wrote:
Rinkals wrote:
I am absolutely astonished that people who consider themselves to be part of (nay, not just part of, but leaders at the top level of) the Intelligentsia (I'm looking at you, Sen and Santa) .


Leave Santa out of this pal. It's only me who is a self-appointed leader of The Intelligentsia. Santa's status has been tested, approved and stamped by the exalted and immortal elites who for a thousand years have determined who gets to comport themselves in such fashion.


I have no doubt that he'd be badly stung to hear you say that.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 13, 2019 6:59 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2019 2:59 pm
Posts: 544
If the Bidens are guilty of crimes, they can be prosecuted and tried in the courts, in the usual way.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 13, 2019 7:00 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 34073
The main problem I have with most of this is that it obscures the really interesting story that continues to go right to the very dark heart of this entire affair, and that is what the hell is going on in DC with the state dept and other murky actors and Russia and Ukraine? It was less than a decade ago that the Democrats howled with laughter when Romney tried to argue Russia was America's largest security threat and Obama zinged him to death with millennial humour and the lolz never stopped. Then a few mere years later Russia and Putin are the darkest force that ever lived, the CIA and state dept have engineered a pretty nasty and sordid revolution in Kiev, kicked off a war in eastern Ukraine, and lost the Crimea to boot. What the hell happened there? Seriously?

By having the temerity to suggest that maybe the US didn't have a serious cold war style beef with Russia, and there weren't geo-strategic conflicts of interest that merited a third world war, Trump has been under assailment from start to finish and the entire Washington establishment has been dragged into a Kiev vortex from which it shows no sign of leaving anytime soon.

I have my theories.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 13, 2019 7:01 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 34073
6.Jones wrote:
If the Bidens are guilty of crimes, they can be prosecuted and tried in the courts, in the usual way.


Like Epstein and Hillary?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 13, 2019 7:03 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2012 11:30 am
Posts: 4085
Santa is jut being silly


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 13, 2019 7:05 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2019 2:59 pm
Posts: 544
Seneca of the Night wrote:
The main problem I have with most of this is that it obscures the really interesting story that continues to go right to the very dark heart of this entire affair, and that is what the hell is going on in DC with the state dept and other murky actors and Russia and Ukraine? It was less than a decade ago that the Democrats howled with laughter when Romney tried to argue Russia was America's largest security threat and Obama zinged him to death with millennial humour and the lolz never stopped. Then a few mere years later Russia and Putin are the darkest force that ever lived, the CIA and state dept have engineered a pretty nasty and sordid revolution in Kiev, kicked off a war in eastern Ukraine, and lost the Crimea to boot. What the hell happened there? Seriously?

By having the temerity to suggest that maybe the US didn't have a serious cold war style beef with Russia, and there weren't geo-strategic conflicts of interest that merited a third world war, Trump has been under assailment from start to finish and the entire Washington establishment has been dragged into a Kiev vortex from which it shows no sign of leaving anytime soon.

I have my theories.

It's hard to argue with that. American politics has taken arms against a sea of troubles, and by opposing, fcuked them. The same thing happened when I tried to teach my cat algebra.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 13, 2019 7:06 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2019 2:59 pm
Posts: 544
Seneca of the Night wrote:
6.Jones wrote:
If the Bidens are guilty of crimes, they can be prosecuted and tried in the courts, in the usual way.


Like Epstein and Hillary?

If Hillary committed crimes, she should be prosecuted too. Epstein, his problem was sexy kids.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 13, 2019 7:07 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:56 pm
Posts: 9194
6.Jones wrote:
Santa wrote:
Flockwitt wrote:
What nobody has attempted to do here is suggest alternatives regards what the Dems are supposed to do in this case. Sit on their hands and be tossed out of office because of a failure to uphold their duties?

So they run an impeachment inquiry, which they should do given the circumstances, there doesn't seem to be any option there. I'm wondering though what options they have has a result of the inquiry. Does it have to be impeachment and attempting removal from office though the Senate trial? Could they for instance have a vote of censure?


Nothing. This is a nothing situation where nothing actually happened. However, they set this whole thing up and now they have to live with it. That they have undermined their weak current position by being utterly hysterical for the last three years hasn't helped. They are a rabble.


Didn't he allegedly bribe Ukrainian officials to investigate the Bidens?

And isn't bribery one of the explicit heads of impeachment in their constitution? "The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors."

It seems somewhat circular to claim he shouldn't be impeached because he didn't do it, when this is the mechanism intended to find out if he did.


You reckon he bribed them with aid that was already going to them?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 13, 2019 7:08 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:56 pm
Posts: 9194
6.Jones wrote:
Maybe the argument is that it isn't bribery, because he wasn't offering anything corruptly, but instead withholding something corruptly.

That'd be extortion, and extortion isn't explicitly mentioned in the constitution.


Extortion? You mean US foreign policy?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 13, 2019 7:08 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2019 2:59 pm
Posts: 544
Santa wrote:
6.Jones wrote:
Santa wrote:
Flockwitt wrote:
What nobody has attempted to do here is suggest alternatives regards what the Dems are supposed to do in this case. Sit on their hands and be tossed out of office because of a failure to uphold their duties?

So they run an impeachment inquiry, which they should do given the circumstances, there doesn't seem to be any option there. I'm wondering though what options they have has a result of the inquiry. Does it have to be impeachment and attempting removal from office though the Senate trial? Could they for instance have a vote of censure?


Nothing. This is a nothing situation where nothing actually happened. However, they set this whole thing up and now they have to live with it. That they have undermined their weak current position by being utterly hysterical for the last three years hasn't helped. They are a rabble.


Didn't he allegedly bribe Ukrainian officials to investigate the Bidens?

And isn't bribery one of the explicit heads of impeachment in their constitution? "The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors."

It seems somewhat circular to claim he shouldn't be impeached because he didn't do it, when this is the mechanism intended to find out if he did.


You reckon he bribed them with aid that was already going to them?

Nah.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 13, 2019 7:09 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2019 2:59 pm
Posts: 544
Santa wrote:
6.Jones wrote:
Maybe the argument is that it isn't bribery, because he wasn't offering anything corruptly, but instead withholding something corruptly.

That'd be extortion, and extortion isn't explicitly mentioned in the constitution.


Extortion? You mean US foreign policy?

Indeed. States can do what mere mortals cannot, as I found out to my cost when I tried to invade Panama.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 13, 2019 7:11 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:56 pm
Posts: 9194
OK. So bribery and extortion are off the table. That leaves high crimes and misdemeanors. I think jaywalking is a misdemeanor.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 13, 2019 7:11 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 34073
6.Jones wrote:
Seneca of the Night wrote:
The main problem I have with most of this is that it obscures the really interesting story that continues to go right to the very dark heart of this entire affair, and that is what the hell is going on in DC with the state dept and other murky actors and Russia and Ukraine? It was less than a decade ago that the Democrats howled with laughter when Romney tried to argue Russia was America's largest security threat and Obama zinged him to death with millennial humour and the lolz never stopped. Then a few mere years later Russia and Putin are the darkest force that ever lived, the CIA and state dept have engineered a pretty nasty and sordid revolution in Kiev, kicked off a war in eastern Ukraine, and lost the Crimea to boot. What the hell happened there? Seriously?

By having the temerity to suggest that maybe the US didn't have a serious cold war style beef with Russia, and there weren't geo-strategic conflicts of interest that merited a third world war, Trump has been under assailment from start to finish and the entire Washington establishment has been dragged into a Kiev vortex from which it shows no sign of leaving anytime soon.

I have my theories.

It's hard to argue with that. American politics has taken arms against a sea of troubles, and by opposing, fcuked them. The same thing happened when I tried to teach my cat algebra.


Kiev is now the exact geographic spot where the Atlantic * meets the Orthodox world. Why someone decided to move it that far east, and so quickly, is a question historians will ponder for many many years. But ask the Germans what they think of that bit of land; I'm surmising they will shudder. Don't go there they will say. The Americans have gone there, and anything could now happen, up to and including the collapse of the entire Republic. They are going to really struggle to get out of this one.

* by which I mean Atlanticism - for that is what the Obama state dept did - move NATO in a sense as far west as to engulf Western Ukraine. Kiev now has the same sort of role as Berlin did in the cold war.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 13, 2019 7:12 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2017 6:56 pm
Posts: 9194
6.Jones wrote:
Santa wrote:
6.Jones wrote:
Maybe the argument is that it isn't bribery, because he wasn't offering anything corruptly, but instead withholding something corruptly.

That'd be extortion, and extortion isn't explicitly mentioned in the constitution.


Extortion? You mean US foreign policy?

Indeed. States can do what mere mortals cannot, as I found out to my cost when I tried to invade Panama.


Well look I would probably support impeaching all US Presidents who engage in foreign policy. Trump at least is trying not to.


Last edited by Santa on Wed Nov 13, 2019 7:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 13, 2019 7:13 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 34073
Santa wrote:
6.Jones wrote:
Santa wrote:
6.Jones wrote:
Maybe the argument is that it isn't bribery, because he wasn't offering anything corruptly, but instead withholding something corruptly.

That'd be extortion, and extortion isn't explicitly mentioned in the constitution.


Extortion? You mean US foreign policy?

Indeed. States can do what mere mortals cannot, as I found out to my cost when I tried to invade Panama.


Well look I would probably supporting all US Presidents who engage in foreign policy. Trump at least is trying not to.


Apparently he's not allowed to.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 105250 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 2572, 2573, 2574, 2575, 2576, 2577, 2578 ... 2632  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Diabhal, Google Adsense [Bot], Leinsterman, Lobby, Luciano, Man In Black, Mr. Very Popular, ovalball, Oxbow, rialtoblue, Sandstorm, sockwithaticket, Ulsters Red Hand, Wendigo7, Willie Falloon and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group