Chat Forum
It is currently Tue Jun 02, 2020 12:28 pm

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 113022 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 2662, 2663, 2664, 2665, 2666, 2667, 2668 ... 2826  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Jan 28, 2020 8:56 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 37132
sorCrer wrote:
Seneca of the Night wrote:
sorCrer wrote:
Some chutzpah Netanyahu & Trump have. Declaring their 2 state solution to the world.


Are you an anti-semite?


No.


Good luck.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 28, 2020 10:58 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2014 9:01 am
Posts: 8343
sorCrer wrote:
Some chutzpah Netanyahu & Trump have. Declaring their 2 state solution to the world.


Israel and the USA? With Trump leading negotiations the USA will be down to State, possibly Wyoming.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 28, 2020 11:18 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 11853
Location: Europe
so what's with this cnn elites laughing at the common folk scandal ? does it have any legs ?

Quote:
The CNN footage was broadcast on Saturday night but came to attention on Monday when an excerpt was tweeted by the media analyst Steve Krakauer.

In the footage, Wilson and the New York Times columnist Wajahat Ali joined Lemon to discuss secretary of state Mike Pompeo’s public clash with NPR over a reporter’s questions about Ukraine.

Pompeo, Wilson said, “knows deep in his heart that Donald Trump couldn’t find Ukraine on a map if you had the letter U and a picture of an actual physical crane next to it. He knows that this is an administration defined by actual ignorance of the world.”

Lemon burst into laughter, lowering his head to his desk and mopping his eyes with a handkerchief.

Pompeo, Wilson continued, was “playing to [the Republican] base. You know, the credulous boomer rube demo that backs Donald Trump that thinks Donald Trump’s the smart one and” – he adopted an exaggerated accent – “Y’all elitists are dumb.”

Amid laughter, Ali interjected: “You elitists, with your geography and your maps and your spelling.”

After more remarks and more laughter, Ali said: “Sorry, I apologise. It was Rick’s fault. I blame Rick.”

Collecting himself, Lemon said: “That was a good one. I needed that.”

In his tweet, Krakauer wrote: “The arrogance, the dismissiveness, the smug cackling, the accents. If Donald Trump wins re-election this year, I’ll remember this brief CNN segment late one Saturday night in January as the perfect encapsulation for why it happened.”

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video ... rubes.html


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 28, 2020 11:36 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2012 9:10 pm
Posts: 3340
Location: Boston
piquant wrote:
sorCrer wrote:
Some chutzpah Netanyahu & Trump have. Declaring their 2 state solution to the world.


Israel and the USA? With Trump leading negotiations the USA will be down to State, possibly Wyoming.


You could do a hell of a lot worse....magnificent place.

Instead all the tourists want to go to Times Square and stare at 200 foot tall Coca Cola signs. Ah well.

Edit: apols for the non-sequitur, I've got a veritable thousand yard stare when it comes to this topic. As you were.

Edit 2: It's like the replacements episode of Band of Brothers: the American posters are Perconte and this entire fvcking thread is filled with a bunch of goofy-ass O'Keefes: https://youtu.be/tMlemhFqowU


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 29, 2020 12:16 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2019 2:59 pm
Posts: 2567
Quote:
Senator Mitch McConnell, the majority leader, told a closed-door meeting of Republicans that he does not currently have the votes to block Democrats from calling witnesses at the trial

https://www.nytimes.com/live/2020/impeachment-trial-live-01-28?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage#mcconnell-democrats-witnesses

Game on. Wouldn't it be funny if this mudslide started a landslide. My corn is popped and ready to chew on.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 29, 2020 12:19 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2019 2:59 pm
Posts: 2567
Akkerman wrote:
so what's with this cnn elites laughing at the common folk scandal ? does it have any legs ?

Quote:
The CNN footage was broadcast on Saturday night but came to attention on Monday when an excerpt was tweeted by the media analyst Steve Krakauer.

In the footage, Wilson and the New York Times columnist Wajahat Ali joined Lemon to discuss secretary of state Mike Pompeo’s public clash with NPR over a reporter’s questions about Ukraine.

Pompeo, Wilson said, “knows deep in his heart that Donald Trump couldn’t find Ukraine on a map if you had the letter U and a picture of an actual physical crane next to it. He knows that this is an administration defined by actual ignorance of the world.”

Lemon burst into laughter, lowering his head to his desk and mopping his eyes with a handkerchief.

Pompeo, Wilson continued, was “playing to [the Republican] base. You know, the credulous boomer rube demo that backs Donald Trump that thinks Donald Trump’s the smart one and” – he adopted an exaggerated accent – “Y’all elitists are dumb.”

Amid laughter, Ali interjected: “You elitists, with your geography and your maps and your spelling.”

After more remarks and more laughter, Ali said: “Sorry, I apologise. It was Rick’s fault. I blame Rick.”

Collecting himself, Lemon said: “That was a good one. I needed that.”

In his tweet, Krakauer wrote: “The arrogance, the dismissiveness, the smug cackling, the accents. If Donald Trump wins re-election this year, I’ll remember this brief CNN segment late one Saturday night in January as the perfect encapsulation for why it happened.”

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video ... rubes.html


Only with the credulous boomer rube demo.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 29, 2020 1:22 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 20446
Location: A vacant lot next to a pile of rubble
6.Jones wrote:
Quote:
Senator Mitch McConnell, the majority leader, told a closed-door meeting of Republicans that he does not currently have the votes to block Democrats from calling witnesses at the trial

https://www.nytimes.com/live/2020/impeachment-trial-live-01-28?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage#mcconnell-democrats-witnesses

Game on. Wouldn't it be funny if this mudslide started a landslide. My corn is popped and ready to chew on.



Surely this can't be right. Why would people who have sworn an oath to deliver impartial justice want to block witnesses?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 29, 2020 1:36 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 1743
Fat Old Git wrote:
6.Jones wrote:
Quote:
Senator Mitch McConnell, the majority leader, told a closed-door meeting of Republicans that he does not currently have the votes to block Democrats from calling witnesses at the trial

https://www.nytimes.com/live/2020/impeachment-trial-live-01-28?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage#mcconnell-democrats-witnesses

Game on. Wouldn't it be funny if this mudslide started a landslide. My corn is popped and ready to chew on.



Surely this can't be right. Why would people who have sworn an oath to deliver impartial justice want to block witnesses?

When there has been no crime committed, and the so called victim of the crime says that no crime has been committed, what is the point of calling any other witness?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 29, 2020 2:46 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2019 2:59 pm
Posts: 2567
BillW wrote:
Fat Old Git wrote:
6.Jones wrote:
Quote:
Senator Mitch McConnell, the majority leader, told a closed-door meeting of Republicans that he does not currently have the votes to block Democrats from calling witnesses at the trial

https://www.nytimes.com/live/2020/impeachment-trial-live-01-28?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage#mcconnell-democrats-witnesses

Game on. Wouldn't it be funny if this mudslide started a landslide. My corn is popped and ready to chew on.



Surely this can't be right. Why would people who have sworn an oath to deliver impartial justice want to block witnesses?

When there has been no crime committed, and the so called victim of the crime says that no crime has been committed, what is the point of calling any other witness?

Erm... the witness might have evidence of the crime?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 29, 2020 2:55 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2019 2:59 pm
Posts: 2567
And the reportage of victims of extortion is hardly good evidence.

Did Joey Gambino put that horse's head in your bed, Mr Zelinskiy?
No, Mr Gambino didn't put that horses head in my bed, your honor, and it wasn't my bed, and it wasn't a horse, and Joey, he never did it.
But the prosecution has a picture of Mr Gambino putting it there.
Well it wasn't my bed. And that isn't a horse. It's a dog.
A dog?
A big dog.
And that isn't your bed? It has your name on the pillows.
That isn't my name. Those aren't my pillows.
Do you have an ongoing business relationship with Mr Gambino, Mr Zelinskiy?
Who's Joey Gambino?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 29, 2020 2:59 am 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 40515
BillW wrote:
Fat Old Git wrote:
6.Jones wrote:
Quote:
Senator Mitch McConnell, the majority leader, told a closed-door meeting of Republicans that he does not currently have the votes to block Democrats from calling witnesses at the trial

https://www.nytimes.com/live/2020/impeachment-trial-live-01-28?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage#mcconnell-democrats-witnesses

Game on. Wouldn't it be funny if this mudslide started a landslide. My corn is popped and ready to chew on.



Surely this can't be right. Why would people who have sworn an oath to deliver impartial justice want to block witnesses?

When Trump assures you there has been no crime committed, and the so called victim of the crime says that no crime has been committed, what is the point of calling any other witness?


Fixed


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 29, 2020 3:01 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 20446
Location: A vacant lot next to a pile of rubble
6.Jones wrote:
And the reportage of victims of extortion is hardly good evidence.

Did Joey Gambino put that horse's head in your bed, Mr Zelinskiy?
No, Mr Gambino didn't put that horses head in my bed, your honor, and it wasn't my bed, and it wasn't a horse, and Joey, he never did it.
But the prosecution has a picture of Mr Gambino putting it there.
Well it wasn't my bed. And that isn't a horse. It's a dog.
A dog?
A big dog.
And that isn't your bed? It has your name on the pillows.
That isn't my name. Those aren't my pillows.
Do you have an ongoing business relationship with Mr Gambino, Mr Zelinskiy?
Who's Joey Gambino?


Indeed,

"Did your husband hit you?"
"No, I walked into a door your honor."


Last edited by Fat Old Git on Wed Jan 29, 2020 3:02 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 29, 2020 3:02 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 3212
BillW wrote:
Fat Old Git wrote:
6.Jones wrote:
Quote:
Senator Mitch McConnell, the majority leader, told a closed-door meeting of Republicans that he does not currently have the votes to block Democrats from calling witnesses at the trial

https://www.nytimes.com/live/2020/impeachment-trial-live-01-28?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage#mcconnell-democrats-witnesses

Game on. Wouldn't it be funny if this mudslide started a landslide. My corn is popped and ready to chew on.



Surely this can't be right. Why would people who have sworn an oath to deliver impartial justice want to block witnesses?

When there has been no crime committed, and the so called victim of the crime says that no crime has been committed, what is the point of calling any other witness?


I know it's the case in the UK that the prosecution can still go ahead with a trial even if the victim has refused to testify or said that no crime was commited. Maybe in the land of the brave they just pay people off instead?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 29, 2020 3:02 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 8539
the orange shitgibbon only has the best people


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 29, 2020 3:10 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 3212
Hong Kong wrote:


"We come against the marine kingdom, we come against the animal kingdom," said White, eyes closed. "We declare that any strange winds — any strange winds that have been sent to hurt the church, sent against this nation, sent against our president, sent against myself, sent against others — we break it by the superior blood of Jesus right now."

:uhoh: :uhoh:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 29, 2020 5:08 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 1743
Fat Old Git wrote:
6.Jones wrote:
And the reportage of victims of extortion is hardly good evidence.

Did Joey Gambino put that horse's head in your bed, Mr Zelinskiy?
No, Mr Gambino didn't put that horses head in my bed, your honor, and it wasn't my bed, and it wasn't a horse, and Joey, he never did it.
But the prosecution has a picture of Mr Gambino putting it there.
Well it wasn't my bed. And that isn't a horse. It's a dog.
A dog?
A big dog.
And that isn't your bed? It has your name on the pillows.
That isn't my name. Those aren't my pillows.
Do you have an ongoing business relationship with Mr Gambino, Mr Zelinskiy?
Who's Joey Gambino?


Indeed,

"Did your husband hit you?"
"No, I walked into a door your honor."

I get it.
She's a woman.
You can't believe anything they say.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 29, 2020 6:23 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2019 2:59 pm
Posts: 2567
Fat Old Git wrote:
6.Jones wrote:
And the reportage of victims of extortion is hardly good evidence.

Did Joey Gambino put that horse's head in your bed, Mr Zelinskiy?
No, Mr Gambino didn't put that horses head in my bed, your honor, and it wasn't my bed, and it wasn't a horse, and Joey, he never did it.
But the prosecution has a picture of Mr Gambino putting it there.
Well it wasn't my bed. And that isn't a horse. It's a dog.
A dog?
A big dog.
And that isn't your bed? It has your name on the pillows.
That isn't my name. Those aren't my pillows.
Do you have an ongoing business relationship with Mr Gambino, Mr Zelinskiy?
Who's Joey Gambino?


Indeed,

"Did your husband hit you?"
"No, I walked into a door your honor."


Let me be absolutely clear. I wasn't reporting an actual conversation between anyone.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 29, 2020 6:24 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2019 2:59 pm
Posts: 2567
BillW wrote:
Fat Old Git wrote:
6.Jones wrote:
And the reportage of victims of extortion is hardly good evidence.

Did Joey Gambino put that horse's head in your bed, Mr Zelinskiy?
No, Mr Gambino didn't put that horses head in my bed, your honor, and it wasn't my bed, and it wasn't a horse, and Joey, he never did it.
But the prosecution has a picture of Mr Gambino putting it there.
Well it wasn't my bed. And that isn't a horse. It's a dog.
A dog?
A big dog.
And that isn't your bed? It has your name on the pillows.
That isn't my name. Those aren't my pillows.
Do you have an ongoing business relationship with Mr Gambino, Mr Zelinskiy?
Who's Joey Gambino?


Indeed,

"Did your husband hit you?"
"No, I walked into a door your honor."

I get it.
She's a woman.
You can't believe anything they say.


No, she's a Ukrainian.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 29, 2020 6:30 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 20446
Location: A vacant lot next to a pile of rubble
6.Jones wrote:
Fat Old Git wrote:
6.Jones wrote:
And the reportage of victims of extortion is hardly good evidence.

Did Joey Gambino put that horse's head in your bed, Mr Zelinskiy?
No, Mr Gambino didn't put that horses head in my bed, your honor, and it wasn't my bed, and it wasn't a horse, and Joey, he never did it.
But the prosecution has a picture of Mr Gambino putting it there.
Well it wasn't my bed. And that isn't a horse. It's a dog.
A dog?
A big dog.
And that isn't your bed? It has your name on the pillows.
That isn't my name. Those aren't my pillows.
Do you have an ongoing business relationship with Mr Gambino, Mr Zelinskiy?
Who's Joey Gambino?


Indeed,

"Did your husband hit you?"
"No, I walked into a door your honor."


Let me be absolutely clear. I wasn't reporting an actual conversation between anyone.


I wouldn't have thought anyone would have thought you were, but given some of the exchanges on this thread that might be wishful thinking.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 29, 2020 6:39 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2019 2:59 pm
Posts: 2567
Fat Old Git wrote:
6.Jones wrote:
Fat Old Git wrote:
6.Jones wrote:
And the reportage of victims of extortion is hardly good evidence.

Did Joey Gambino put that horse's head in your bed, Mr Zelinskiy?
No, Mr Gambino didn't put that horses head in my bed, your honor, and it wasn't my bed, and it wasn't a horse, and Joey, he never did it.
But the prosecution has a picture of Mr Gambino putting it there.
Well it wasn't my bed. And that isn't a horse. It's a dog.
A dog?
A big dog.
And that isn't your bed? It has your name on the pillows.
That isn't my name. Those aren't my pillows.
Do you have an ongoing business relationship with Mr Gambino, Mr Zelinskiy?
Who's Joey Gambino?


Indeed,

"Did your husband hit you?"
"No, I walked into a door your honor."


Let me be absolutely clear. I wasn't reporting an actual conversation between anyone.


I wouldn't have thought anyone would have thought you were, but given some of the exchanges on this thread that might be wishful thinking.


I was thinking more of the Republicans' treating Schifty's paraphrasing of Joey's... erm, Trumps conversation with Zelinskiy as a literal lie.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 29, 2020 8:30 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 17069
BillW wrote:
Fat Old Git wrote:
6.Jones wrote:
Quote:
Senator Mitch McConnell, the majority leader, told a closed-door meeting of Republicans that he does not currently have the votes to block Democrats from calling witnesses at the trial

https://www.nytimes.com/live/2020/impeachment-trial-live-01-28?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage#mcconnell-democrats-witnesses

Game on. Wouldn't it be funny if this mudslide started a landslide. My corn is popped and ready to chew on.



Surely this can't be right. Why would people who have sworn an oath to deliver impartial justice want to block witnesses?

When there has been no crime committed, and the so called victim of the crime says that no crime has been committed, what is the point of calling any other witness?



Because the defendant's word is routinely accepted without corroboration?

Even WT, our resident lawyer may have a problem with that.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 29, 2020 9:52 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 17069
Flyin Ryan wrote:
Flockwitt wrote:
TheFrog wrote:
Quote:
Other Trump allies are also echoing this line, declaring that if Bolton is called, then “the floodgates are opened.


Republicans messages : interesting because this kind of implies that they are pretty sure dirt will come out of a Bolton testimony under oath, in other terms, they seem to worry that Trump is actually guilty, and that the only response is atomic war and therefore bringing Hunter Biden into the battle.

Says so much about how much they trust their President's honesty, and may explain why the "cover up" accusations did hit a sensitive point with them....

Leftist source for context :

https://www.politico.com/amp/news/2020/01/27/romney-trial-impeachment-senate-trump-107171

It's pretty moot how much of a stink the GOP provide about Biden's son IMHO and one with plenty of connotations a) it's a tacit admission that their initial line of defense for Trump was off the mark and trying to now pitch that Trump's actions needed to be done to counter the past corruption is fragile, if Bolton comes in and that then provides the impetus for Mulvaney who contradict that narrative it won't fly plus b) highly dangerous in that it'll appeal to sections the 'base' but be highly unpopular with a lot of the US general public, Biden is still a popular guy in many ways and trying drag his son through the mud to save Trump's skin is as risky as impeachment was for the Dems.


The general public is not paying attention to the details of this. If you're a Democrat you're "hang the bastard". If you're a Republican you're "this is all a coup". The apolitical don't care and think they're all crooks. There is hardly anyone in this country that is watching all this, taking in the data with a straight face, and viewing it with a level of nuance. If those kinds of individuals were higher in number, C-SPAN would have higher ratings throughout the year.

I for one welcome President Pence. It'd ensure Sanders loses in November. :lol:

(I think at minimum the 4 suspected Republicans will force McConnell to have Bolton testify.)

How dispiriting.

It may be a common trope to suggest that all politicians are crooks, but the notion that Trump's behaviour is acceptable to the American people is a little disheartening.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 29, 2020 10:01 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 11286
Rinkals wrote:
Flyin Ryan wrote:
Flockwitt wrote:
TheFrog wrote:

Republicans messages : interesting because this kind of implies that they are pretty sure dirt will come out of a Bolton testimony under oath, in other terms, they seem to worry that Trump is actually guilty, and that the only response is atomic war and therefore bringing Hunter Biden into the battle.

Says so much about how much they trust their President's honesty, and may explain why the "cover up" accusations did hit a sensitive point with them....

Leftist source for context :

https://www.politico.com/amp/news/2020/01/27/romney-trial-impeachment-senate-trump-107171

It's pretty moot how much of a stink the GOP provide about Biden's son IMHO and one with plenty of connotations a) it's a tacit admission that their initial line of defense for Trump was off the mark and trying to now pitch that Trump's actions needed to be done to counter the past corruption is fragile, if Bolton comes in and that then provides the impetus for Mulvaney who contradict that narrative it won't fly plus b) highly dangerous in that it'll appeal to sections the 'base' but be highly unpopular with a lot of the US general public, Biden is still a popular guy in many ways and trying drag his son through the mud to save Trump's skin is as risky as impeachment was for the Dems.


The general public is not paying attention to the details of this. If you're a Democrat you're "hang the bastard". If you're a Republican you're "this is all a coup". The apolitical don't care and think they're all crooks. There is hardly anyone in this country that is watching all this, taking in the data with a straight face, and viewing it with a level of nuance. If those kinds of individuals were higher in number, C-SPAN would have higher ratings throughout the year.

I for one welcome President Pence. It'd ensure Sanders loses in November. :lol:

(I think at minimum the 4 suspected Republicans will force McConnell to have Bolton testify.)

How dispiriting.

It may be a common trope to suggest that all politicians are crooks, but the notion that Trump's behaviour is acceptable to the American people is a little disheartening.


I think it is wrong to assume that all Republicans consider the Dems actions as a coup. A lot of Republicans I have met hate Trump's guts and secretly wish he could be brought down. But at the same time, they do not want Dems to seize power.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 29, 2020 10:13 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 17069
TheFrog wrote:
I think it is wrong to assume that all Republicans consider the Dems actions as a coup. A lot of Republicans I have met hate Trump's guts and secretly wish he could be brought down. But at the same time, they do not want Dems to seize power.


If that's he case, then surely the best way of ensuring a Republican President would be to impeach or to nominate a more suitable candidate for the Presidential race? Trump has to be the weakest link.

Frankly, whoever takes over after Trump is going to have to repair this mess, it'll be a poisoned chalice for any Dem nominee.

Probably better for the Dems to Let Trump continue so that they don't have to take the blame.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 29, 2020 10:15 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 11286
Interesting that the defense little debates the merit of impeaching Trump on the basis of obstruction of Congress... in the context of the Bolton revelations, this is becoming even more sensitive...

And if I were the accusation, I would focus the prosecution on that article of impeachment.

Acquitting Trump will create the precedent that President could be free to hide any evidence from a Congress inquiry in the future.

Can the Republican accept that a Democrat President could get away with murder in the future thanks to their vote on Friday?

Alternatively, if Republican Senators agree to call witnesses and subpoena documents from the administration and settle a deal with Trump that they will acquit him once he has released all evidence of his innocence or at least that the quid pro quo was for a perfectly legitimate motive, then they would have both protected the Constitution and shown the Democrats what a fair trial is.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 29, 2020 10:17 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 11286
Rinkals wrote:
TheFrog wrote:
I think it is wrong to assume that all Republicans consider the Dems actions as a coup. A lot of Republicans I have met hate Trump's guts and secretly wish he could be brought down. But at the same time, they do not want Dems to seize power.


If that's he case, then surely the best way of ensuring a Republican President would be to impeach or to nominate a more suitable candidate for the Presidential race? Trump has to be the weakest link.

Frankly, whoever takes over after Trump is going to have to repair this mess, it'll be a poisoned chalice for any Dem nominee.

Probably better for the Dems to Let Trump continue so that they don't have to take the blame.


The Republicans are highly divided internally and for the time being, party discipline is their only chance of survival despite the sensitivities.

Beside, Trump rules by fear and for now, his opposition don't feel like dying as martyrs.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 29, 2020 10:18 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2014 9:01 am
Posts: 8343
Rinkals wrote:
TheFrog wrote:
I think it is wrong to assume that all Republicans consider the Dems actions as a coup. A lot of Republicans I have met hate Trump's guts and secretly wish he could be brought down. But at the same time, they do not want Dems to seize power.


If that's he case, then surely the best way of ensuring a Republican President would be to impeach or to nominate a more suitable candidate for the Presidential race? Trump has to be the weakest link.

Frankly, whoever takes over after Trump is going to have to repair this mess, it'll be a poisoned chalice for any Dem nominee.

Probably better for the Dems to Let Trump continue so that they don't have to take the blame.



Repair the mess, or double down on guns, abortion, border walls and hope nobody notices the environment, deficit and spending, health and education, infrastructure, crime, prisons...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 29, 2020 10:21 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 11286
piquant wrote:
Rinkals wrote:
TheFrog wrote:
I think it is wrong to assume that all Republicans consider the Dems actions as a coup. A lot of Republicans I have met hate Trump's guts and secretly wish he could be brought down. But at the same time, they do not want Dems to seize power.


If that's he case, then surely the best way of ensuring a Republican President would be to impeach or to nominate a more suitable candidate for the Presidential race? Trump has to be the weakest link.

Frankly, whoever takes over after Trump is going to have to repair this mess, it'll be a poisoned chalice for any Dem nominee.

Probably better for the Dems to Let Trump continue so that they don't have to take the blame.



Repair the mess, or double down on guns, abortion, border walls and hope nobody notices the environment, deficit and spending, health and education, infrastructure, crime, prisons...


The economy is doing well though and that the Trump card if I may say.

And a lot of Republican agree with Trump's policies on the economy. The only debate is about international relationships: both the trade war approach, and the geo-strategic positioning.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 29, 2020 11:02 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2014 9:01 am
Posts: 8343
TheFrog wrote:
piquant wrote:
Rinkals wrote:
TheFrog wrote:
I think it is wrong to assume that all Republicans consider the Dems actions as a coup. A lot of Republicans I have met hate Trump's guts and secretly wish he could be brought down. But at the same time, they do not want Dems to seize power.


If that's he case, then surely the best way of ensuring a Republican President would be to impeach or to nominate a more suitable candidate for the Presidential race? Trump has to be the weakest link.

Frankly, whoever takes over after Trump is going to have to repair this mess, it'll be a poisoned chalice for any Dem nominee.

Probably better for the Dems to Let Trump continue so that they don't have to take the blame.



Repair the mess, or double down on guns, abortion, border walls and hope nobody notices the environment, deficit and spending, health and education, infrastructure, crime, prisons...


The economy is doing well though and that the Trump card if I may say.

And a lot of Republican agree with Trump's policies on the economy. The only debate is about international relationships: both the trade war approach, and the geo-strategic positioning.


De regulation sure, but not maybe on all areas of say the environment, as you note they certainly don't all agree with his trade wars, they're supposed to be deficit hawks (many of them) so exploding the spend on the national credit card creating a problem down the line should be anathema, so we've really only got tax cuts for the wealthy we can be sure of

The rest of the economy is really what Trump inherited, and from the economy not from Obama 'cause despite Trump's claims he's created jobs governments don't really do that


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 29, 2020 11:05 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 11286
https://www.thedailybeast.com/fox-news-anchor-chris-wallace-tells-conservative-pundit-katie-pavlich-get-your-facts-straight


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 29, 2020 11:53 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2012 11:30 am
Posts: 4821
Chris Wallace is getting more and more frustrated with his colleagues over at Roger Ailes' Gropertorium.

Trump reacted in a unsurprising way:
Quote:
Donald J. Trump

@realDonaldTrump
.....So, what the hell has happened to @FoxNews. Only I know! Chris Wallace and others should be on Fake News CNN or MSDNC. How’s Shep Smith doing? Watch, this will be the beginning of the end for Fox, just like the other two which are dying in the ratings. Social Media is great!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 29, 2020 1:29 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2014 9:01 am
Posts: 8343
I admire his courage in calling John Bolton a liar and having his legal team do the same. John never being the kind of chap to go in for way over the top retaliation


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 29, 2020 2:26 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 5576
Location: A gaf in Bracknell
Won’t it just be wonderful if trump becomes the reason fox blows up. The engine that brought him into power Just imploding on itself.

It pretty happens to everything he touches so it won’t be a surprise.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 29, 2020 2:42 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2014 9:01 am
Posts: 8343
houtkabouter wrote:
Won’t it just be wonderful if trump becomes the reason fox blows up. The engine that brought him into power Just imploding on itself.

It pretty happens to everything he touches so it won’t be a surprise.


Are they not still making a lot of money?

About the only way I can see them struggling is a campaign to go after the advertisers, and that's not a problem free approach in a world of free speech


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 29, 2020 4:33 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 17069
piquant wrote:
TheFrog wrote:
piquant wrote:
Rinkals wrote:
TheFrog wrote:
I think it is wrong to assume that all Republicans consider the Dems actions as a coup. A lot of Republicans I have met hate Trump's guts and secretly wish he could be brought down. But at the same time, they do not want Dems to seize power.


If that's he case, then surely the best way of ensuring a Republican President would be to impeach or to nominate a more suitable candidate for the Presidential race? Trump has to be the weakest link.

Frankly, whoever takes over after Trump is going to have to repair this mess, it'll be a poisoned chalice for any Dem nominee.

Probably better for the Dems to Let Trump continue so that they don't have to take the blame.



Repair the mess, or double down on guns, abortion, border walls and hope nobody notices the environment, deficit and spending, health and education, infrastructure, crime, prisons...


The economy is doing well though and that the Trump card if I may say.

And a lot of Republican agree with Trump's policies on the economy. The only debate is about international relationships: both the trade war approach, and the geo-strategic positioning.


De regulation sure, but not maybe on all areas of say the environment, as you note they certainly don't all agree with his trade wars, they're supposed to be deficit hawks (many of them) so exploding the spend on the national credit card creating a problem down the line should be anathema, so we've really only got tax cuts for the wealthy we can be sure of

The rest of the economy is really what Trump inherited, and from the economy not from Obama 'cause despite Trump's claims he's created jobs governments don't really do that

I'm not sure of that.

I think there's a deregulation dividend which applies as Obama era restrictions are repealed.

The question is whether Americans are happy to f uck up the environment and withdraw employment restrictions and it seems they care not a jot.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 29, 2020 4:36 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 1237
Location: Embra
BokJock wrote:
Quote:
Donald J. Trump

@realDonaldTrump
Only I know! .... Social Media is great!

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 29, 2020 4:38 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 37132
piquant wrote:
houtkabouter wrote:
Won’t it just be wonderful if trump becomes the reason fox blows up. The engine that brought him into power Just imploding on itself.

It pretty happens to everything he touches so it won’t be a surprise.


Are they not still making a lot of money?

About the only way I can see them struggling is a campaign to go after the advertisers, and that's not a problem free approach in a world of free speech


There are constant rolling advertising boycotts of Tucker's show. He calls truth to power you see.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 29, 2020 4:39 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 37132
Rinkals wrote:
I'm not sure of that.

I think there's a deregulation dividend which applies as Obama era restrictions are repealed.

The question is whether Americans are happy to f uck up the environment and withdraw employment restrictions and it seems they care not a jot.


Or as I call it, taking the foot off the hose.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 29, 2020 4:43 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 17069
BokJock wrote:
Chris Wallace is getting more and more frustrated with his colleagues over at Roger Ailes' Gropertorium.

Trump reacted in a unsurprising way:
Quote:
Donald J. Trump

@realDonaldTrump
.....So, what the hell has happened to @FoxNews. Only I know! Chris Wallace and others should be on Fake News CNN or MSDNC. How’s Shep Smith doing? Watch, this will be the beginning of the end for Fox, just like the other two which are dying in the ratings. Social Media is great!


Interesting article in El Reg.

You know the President is able to shut down all US comms?

Quote:
And then she took a dark turn. “While we’re at it, we need to update our laws too,” she told the assembled policy wonks, politicians, and lobbyists, “because 47 USC Section 606 gives the president power to shut down communications without clear judicial or legislative review.”

And she is, of course, right. The President of the United States does have extraordinary powers in the event of war, and one of them is the ability to “suspend or amend, for such time as he may see fit, the rules and regulations applicable to any or all stations or devices capable of emitting electromagnetic radiations.”

It goes further than that: the President can “direct that such communications as in his judgment may be essential to the national defense and security shall have preference or priority with any carrier.” And he may “give these directions at and for such times as he may determine, and may modify, change, suspend, or annul them and for any such purpose.”
National security

There are more clauses and that all amount to pretty much the same thing: the President can decide to do pretty much what he wants with communications if he decides it is “essential to the national defense and security.”

In the context of an increasingly partisan and ridiculous Washington, this could be seen as yet another example of over-the-top bluster that no one, not even the speaker, believes to be true but as one tech wonk, Harold Feld of Public Knowledge noted immediately on Twitter:

“I normally think this sort of talk is alarmist, but Rosenworcel is one of the most rational policy wonks I know. If she is worried, I pay attention.”

This is, after all, the same week in which a top lawyer argued in the Senate that the President cannot be removed from power, not even impeached, for an abuse of power – and members of his party lined up behind that argument.

As been made abundantly clear, the current President is not only willing to do things that previous presidents would never have considered, he appears to actively seek out opportunities to use the power of his office to strengthen his own power and chances of re-election.

Does Donald Trump currently have the legal authority to demand that mobile phone networks be shut down? Yes. That Twitter and Facebook stopped sending updates? Yes. That the internet itself be suspended? Yes. Does he has the same authority to push his own messages? Yes, it is literally written into US law.

Is it possible to do so? Yes, it is. Not matter how much we were it weren’t true. No matter how much internet engineers will argue that they can route around such efforts, the truth is that the US government has the ability to bring everything to a grinding halt for 99 per cent of the country. And those companies will obey such an order, especially if granted on a temporary basis using presidential authority.
Stable genius

Which leads to the question: would Trump do it? And the answer: yes of course he would if he thought it would benefit him. The current President has yet to accept a single instance, theoretical of otherwise, of where his authority is limited. He has literally argued that he is not capable of committing a crime while President.

If the polls swing against Donald Trump, if he feels his presidency is under threat, does anyone seriously imagine that he wouldn’t do anything and everything within his power to retain his position?

Rosenworcel’s warning is far from the first time that this theoretical threat has been posed. In March 2018, another policy wonk, Berin Szoka, gave the exact same warning during a speech. A year before that another lobbyist warning on Twitter that the same powers “grant POTUS vast powers to shut down communications networks.”

This time last year, the same Harold Feld as earlier noted on Twitter that “it is a sign of the time that I have been asked about 47 USC 606 more in the last two years than in the entire rest of my 20-year career.”

And that’s not forgetting the serious push back in 2011 – shortly after the Egyptian shutdown – by some in Congress to pass legislation that would specifically lead to the development of an “internet kill switch.”

It was laughed at at the time but the sad truth is that didn’t progress in some part because experts argued that it wasn’t really necessary to have a switch: a presidential order to communications companies would result in the same thing without the need for a new law. Bill Gates concurred.
In his own words

And let’s not forget Donald Trump himself, during the presidential primaries, back in December 2015, long before he entered the White House. “I would certainly be open to closing areas where we are at war with somebody,” he said on stage. “I sure as hell don't want to let people that want to kill us and kill our nation use our Internet.”

So, yes, it’s a real possibility. And now we have an FCC Commissioner – not a lobbyist or a policy wonk talking during a panel session or in theoretical tones – an actual commissioner who would be among the first to see such a presidential order on stage during one of the most significant internet policy conferences that takes place each year, on stage, as part of a keynote speech saying “we need to change this law.”

“Even temporary disruption could create havoc with elections or people’s lives. We need a re-examination of the broad language of 47 USC 606 and we need to create legal guardrails,” she warned.

If you can’t imagine waking up one morning in October or November this year to find Twitter comprises solely of a series of messages from @realDonaldTrump, complete with retweets, and switch on the news to find that the President addressing the nation from the Oval Office on every channel, well then you haven’t been paying attention.

And it would all be legally just fine. ®


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 29, 2020 4:50 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2012 11:30 am
Posts: 4821
Rinkals wrote:
BokJock wrote:
Chris Wallace is getting more and more frustrated with his colleagues over at Roger Ailes' Gropertorium.

Trump reacted in a unsurprising way:
Quote:
Donald J. Trump

@realDonaldTrump
.....So, what the hell has happened to @FoxNews. Only I know! Chris Wallace and others should be on Fake News CNN or MSDNC. How’s Shep Smith doing? Watch, this will be the beginning of the end for Fox, just like the other two which are dying in the ratings. Social Media is great!


Interesting article in El Reg.

You know the President is able to shut down all US comms?



Don't give him ideas :shock:


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 113022 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 2662, 2663, 2664, 2665, 2666, 2667, 2668 ... 2826  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bindi, CarrotGawks, clydecloggie, EverReady, Farva, feckwanker, Google [Bot], irishrugbyua, jambanja, Joost, Kiwias, KnuckleDragger, La soule, Masterji, Monk Zombie, Mr Mike, Nieghorn, obelixtim, Raggs, rialtoblue, robmatic, shereblue, SilverGrin, slick, sonic_attack, Wilson's Toffee and 91 guests


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