Impeachment Jury

[yoink 321]

1 hour ago, nigel99 said:

 

On that note, I will not be surprised if Trump wins a second term. I think Trump appeals to a fairly large segment of the population and gives a voice to those with prejudice. They are too scared to own their views but are happy to allow Trump to be their voice. 

That’s my fear. The normalization of abhorrent behaviors if Trump wins a 2nd term will be shocking.

[jakee 1,255]

1 hour ago, turtlespeed said:

I didn't realize that adolescent Gloating was precedent.

Being petulant because that is what Trump would do, is not true precedent.

I ask again, what do you have to gain by pretending to be so stupid? 

 

The precedent is, this is the exact same thing that happens any time that government documents of historical significance are signed, and it is the same thing that happened the last time a President was impeached. Although on that occasion they had to be taken back because the Republican party didn't know how to spell the name of the country.

 

Quote

I would like for both of them to be better people, but if not, then at least one should take the high road.

That isn't happening with Pelosi so far.

What indication is there that Pelosi isn't taking the high road?

[SkyDekker 1,123]

1 hour ago, jakee said:

Although on that occasion they had to be taken back because the Republican party didn't know how to spell the name of the country.

They were just ahead of the times. Untied States of America seems quite apropos these days.

[turtlespeed 212]

7 hours ago, yoink said:

Oh come on. Do a LITTLE research.

 

Its tradition form both parties for important documents. Cheesy, I admit. But to lambast Pelosi for it specifically AND to make out that it makes her worse than Trump is simply rediculous.

I don't think I said that it made her worse - I believe I made it clear that I see little difference.

[turtlespeed 212]

7 hours ago, billvon said:

I'd like to see your reaction at a jury trial where the foreman of the jury said "I am not going to be impartial" because he knows the prosecutor VERY well - and in fact relies on him for his support.

I don't disagree that I would think that is unjust and anyone with ties should recused themselves.

That would include anyone that has anything to gain or lose from a verdict.

[turtlespeed 212]

6 hours ago, jakee said:

I ask again, what do you have to gain by pretending to be so stupid? 

 

The precedent is, this is the exact same thing that happens any time that government documents of historical significance are signed, and it is the same thing that happened the last time a President was impeached. Although on that occasion they had to be taken back because the Republican party didn't know how to spell the name of the country.

 

What indication is there that Pelosi isn't taking the high road?

Now I ask you your own question: What do you have to gain by pretending to be so stupid? 

Edited January 18, 2020 by turtlespeed

[jakee 1,255]

3 hours ago, turtlespeed said:

I don't think I said that it made her worse - I believe I made it clear that I see little difference.

Which is a hiariously biased view. Come on man, if you're genuinely trying to move past using partisan judgements on every situation you've gotta see that you can do better than this.

[jakee 1,255]

3 hours ago, turtlespeed said:

Now I ask you your own question: What do you have to gain by pretending to be so stupid? 

Nothing. Now you go. Seriously, when you have to pretend you're so clueless about American politics that you don't know they always hand out pens, even after it was specifically pointed out to you several times, just so you can insult Pelosi in a reply - you have to see that the only person who looks bad in that is you, right?

 

It's also clear that you're not taking the thread seriously, since you're obviously just trying to distract from the fact that you have no answers to the important questions. Why should Democrats not bother impeaching Trump just because the Senate is Republican? Do you believe there should be effectively no mechanism whatsoever in the legal or political system for holding a President accountable for crimes and misdeeds? 

[sfzombie13 307]

6 hours ago, jakee said:

 

 

It's also clear that you're not taking the thread seriously, since you're obviously just trying to distract from the fact that you have no answers to the important questions. Why should Democrats not bother impeaching Trump just because the Senate is Republican? Do you believe there should be effectively no mechanism whatsoever in the legal or political system for holding a President accountable for crimes and misdeeds? 

that is the only defense anyone supporting trump has now, attack the process, start a war with iran to distract, deny anything wrong happened, etc, etc.  it is a shame that so many would blindly follow this idiot anywhere when his only political goal so far is to roll back the accomplishments of the "black folks", like the school lunch program.  the real problem is that the supporters are too stupid to realize they are hurting themselves.  we are just all along for the ride, minus turtlespeed of course, who looks to be enjoying it.  god help us all because nobody else will, especially if this idiot gets another term.

[airdvr 197]

I'm going to back up a bit and say the left is to blame.  If you guys had put up anyone other than HRC...

[normiss 622]

59 minutes ago, airdvr said:

I'm going to back up a bit and say the left is to blame.  If you guys had put up anyone other than HRC...

Or maybe believe less of the fake news reasons to hate her?

It's not like she wasn't overly qualified to do the job.

I don't understand the hatred for her.

[nigel99 144]

2 hours ago, normiss said:

Or maybe believe less of the fake news reasons to hate her?

It's not like she wasn't overly qualified to do the job.

I don't understand the hatred for her.

Maybe it is that a large number of American men are afraid of a powerful woman? Maybe they just aren’t ready to accept a female president?

I wonder how much of the religious view is tied in with this that only a man must hold a position of power?

[wolfriverjoe 1,341]

1 hour ago, nigel99 said:

Maybe it is that a large number of American men are afraid of a powerful woman? Maybe they just aren’t ready to accept a female president?

I wonder how much of the religious view is tied in with this that only a man must hold a position of power?

Far more the misogynist male view that is so prevalent in most religions. 

[turtlespeed 212]

On 1/18/2020 at 1:13 AM, jakee said:

Nothing. Now you go. Seriously, when you have to pretend you're so clueless about American politics that you don't know they always hand out pens, even after it was specifically pointed out to you several times, just so you can insult Pelosi in a reply - you have to see that the only person who looks bad in that is you, right?

 

It's also clear that you're not taking the thread seriously, since you're obviously just trying to distract from the fact that you have no answers to the important questions. Why should Democrats not bother impeaching Trump just because the Senate is Republican? Do you believe there should be effectively no mechanism whatsoever in the legal or political system for holding a President accountable for crimes and misdeeds? 

Sigh.

It's not just about the souvenir pens.

It's about the gloating - But you knew that.

You just pretend not to.

Its the statement that "No matter what happens - Trump has been impeached forever!"

How childish and petulant can you be?  It is obviously an immaturity contest between her and Trump.

Lets see who can be the least professional.

Edited January 20, 2020 by turtlespeed

[gowlerk 1,914]

8 minutes ago, turtlespeed said:

It's just about the souvenir pens.

Republican snowflakes are in full melt.

[turtlespeed 212]

1 minute ago, gowlerk said:

Republican snowflakes are in full melt.

 Fixed it.

[jakee 1,255]

3 hours ago, turtlespeed said:

It's not just about the souvenir pens.

Why is it at all about the souvenir pens?

 

Quote

It's about the gloating - But you knew that.

You just pretend not to.

Its the statement that "No matter what happens - Trump has been impeached forever!"

How childish and petulant can you be?  It is obviously an immaturity contest between her and Trump.

See, this is where she just has no chance of winning with hardcore anti democrats like you. She gives out pens, she's accused of not taking it seriously. She points out how serious the situation is, she's accused of gloating. Make up your mind.

 

Quote

Lets see who can be the least professional.

Trump. Obviously Trump. No contest, by a country mile Trump. Even if you only look at statements directly related to impeachment, let alone everything else.

 

But again, this is just a distraction. Why don't you take your own thread seriously and address the real issue. If the Senate shouldn't hold an impeachment trial because it's not impartial, what should happen? If the House shouldn't bother trying to hold a criminal president to account because the Senate will acquit, who should?

[turtlespeed 212]

5 hours ago, jakee said:

If the House shouldn't bother trying to hold a criminal president to account because the Senate will acquit, who should?

That is a good question.

What it sounds like to me is the system is irretrievably broken. 

[gowlerk 1,914]

1 hour ago, turtlespeed said:

What it sounds like to me is the system is irretrievably broken.

The system is a web of compromises. So far it is bending, and not breaking. If anyone can break it, Trump is the man.

[wmw999 2,123]

1 hour ago, gowlerk said:

The system is a web of compromises. So far it is bending, and not breaking. If anyone can break it, Trump is the man.

McConnell broke it before him, and Newt Gingrich before him. Pelosi is learning from them, and they probably don't understand their relationship to Mayor Daley and Boss Tweed. Political machines are about power, and not service. I really think the republic will survive Trump; he'll never go a third term. I'd love to see him defeated in 2020, but if not, I assume he'll end his presidency after that. 

There are no such assurances on Senators and congresscritters. 

In a time of crisis, the nation elected someone to more than two terms (and it was pretty crisis-y -- the depression followed by WW2). And the pushback was a constitutional amendment. That's a pretty big pushback. Even his attempt to pack the Supreme Court in the mid-30's didn't succeed. At that time, I think most of us saw the country as above the political parties.

I honestly hope the country hasn't changed that much. 

Wendy P.

[ryoder 1,387]

1 hour ago, gowlerk said:

The system is a web of compromises. So far it is bending, and not breaking. If anyone can break it, Trump is the child.

FIFY

[gowlerk 1,914]

38 minutes ago, wmw999 said:

McConnell broke it before him, and Newt Gingrich before him.

Both these men have found new and somewhat novel ways to push their agendas by pushing the boundaries of the rules. But Gingrich was undone in the end and McConnell will be as well. Even though at the national level a more conservative policy push is happening at the moment the inevitable backlash is growing. This is evident by the results of the 2018 elections. The system is not broken or breaking, it is reflecting the reality of a society that is divided.

[turtlespeed 212]

29 minutes ago, ryoder said:

FIFY

Scientifically speaking, that is incorrect.

I agree he can be childish, though.

[turtlespeed 212]

10 minutes ago, gowlerk said:

Both these men have found new and somewhat novel ways to push their agendas by pushing the boundaries of the rules. But Gingrich was undone in the end and McConnell will be as well. Even though at the national level a more conservative policy push is happening at the moment the inevitable backlash is growing. This is evident by the results of the 2018 elections. The system is not broken or breaking, it is reflecting the reality of a society that is divided.

We will have to disagree.

A system that allows a Trump in is damaged, and broken.

A system that keeps a Pelosi is damaged and broken

A system that keeps a McConnell is damaged and broken.

I don't know how irreparable the damage is, but it's there.

[yoink 321]

On 1/18/2020 at 2:58 PM, nigel99 said:

Maybe it is that a large number of American men are afraid of a powerful woman? Maybe they just aren’t ready to accept a female president?

I wonder how much of the religious view is tied in with this that only a man must hold a position of power?

I suspect this is a big part of it. It's also true that she was pretty unlikable and carried a serious amount of baggage.

OK airdvr, I've also stated before that the Dems are to blame in a big way for putting forward shit candidates last election, but at that point Trump was a wild card. I understand why people voted for him - it's just possible that he would do everything he promised.

The big question is that now you've seen 4 years of his lying, criminal narcissism would you STILL vote for him over a weak Democrat?