Jump to content

Akkula

Members
  • Content Count

    5,862
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Akkula

  • Rank
    Super Member

Profile Information

  • Team
    Colorado State
  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Wow, it is exhausting trying to fact check these alternative facts all the time, eh?
  2. It is always nice to see two Republicans going after each other.
  3. Impeachment trials and emoluments clauses are also in the constitution. Nobody follows that crap!
  4. Playing fast a loose with the facts may work for the impeachment lawyers of Trump as they address the senate but not MWCboarding!!! That subpena was issued on April 18, 2019. He hasn't testified yet! https://www.politico.com/f/?id=0000016c-6dc6-d14f-ad7e-6fd7372c0000 60. On March 14, 2019, the House of Representatives approved H. Con. Res. 24, calling for the release to Congress of the full Report, once completed, by a vote of 420-0.136 On April 18, 2019, the Judiciary Committee issued a subpoena for the Report and underlying evidence and investigative materials.137 On July 26, 2019, McGahn made clear that he will follow the President’s directive and will not comply with the Judiciary Committee’s subpoena for public testimony. The accommodations process is therefore at an impasse. The goal of the cons has always been for a coverup until after the elction...just like with the tax returns that were promised but have never been provided. If they could tie this thing up in court until after the election that would be great. If not they would wait until the court decison and then scream "executive privledge" and wait another year for the courts.
  5. I have provided evidence that I provided on why they did not go through to the courts. I have given examples of why the courts wouldn't consider it in time for the election that he was trying to steal. You have brought talking points. You have made up your mind that the president is not guilty REGARDLESS of the facts and witnesses. You are afraid of just shining light on this and letting people make their own decisions based on the facts.
  6. Yes, they can send him to the senate for impeachment and the senate can say he has to produce the documents and witnesses or else he is kicked out of office. There has never been a president who has obstructed congress to this extent and there has never been a more cowardly congress who won't support the idea that the administration needs to submit to congressional subpoenas and oversight. They are complicit in the coverup. The House has been trying for months and months to get the testimony from Don Mcghan and it still hasn't secured the testimony regarding the Russia investigation. How can anyone argue the courts are the remedy when they wouldn't be able to act quickly enough to prevent the cheating in the 2020 election? If you dont' believe that the the courts have no oversight just ask Donald Trumps Attorneys---just before they argued the opposite: https://www.politico.com/news/2020/01/21/trumps-impeachment-legal-team-doj-101720 After arguing in court for months that federal judges should stay miles away from disputes between Congress and the White House — for fear that they become political actors in a divisive impeachment probe — the president’s lawyers spent the first working day of Trump’s Senate impeachment trial arguing the exact opposite, and suggesting that those who disagree are hostile to the Constitution. Story Continued Below “The president’s opponents, in their rush to impeach, have refused to wait for judicial review,” said Jay Sekulow, Trump’s personal lawyer, who is working alongside White House counsel Pat Cipollone on the president’s impeachment defense. Sekulow also echoed law professor Jonathan Turley, who recently warned against “making a high crime and misdemeanor out of going to the courts.” Turley testified against Trump’s impeachment during one of the House’s public impeachment hearings.
  7. Maybe shut off fox news. The Democrats subpoenaed many, many, documents and witnesses. The white house refused ALL congressional subpoenas for EVERY inquiry for anything. That is why he is facing obstruction of justice. He never asserted executive privilege at that time and still has not. Furthermore, executive privlege doesn't allow a blanket coverup and the witness still should appear and assert the privlege to specific questions. It cannot be used to coverup a crime. The senate process is a farce.
  8. They count more than his vote. The electoral college, filibuster, and two senators per state effectively deliver the decision making authority to a small slice of the population. Minority rule is how it works in the USA.
  9. Yeah, that is the prevailing theme around these days. All presidents act like scumbags for their own personal benefit.
  10. I just think sometimes people are like, "well they are all crooks" but sometimes that is a kind of a low information voter jedi mind trick. It requires people who don't really pay a lot of attention. If you look at some of the biggest scandals of all the recent past presidencies: IRS Targeting WMD False Information Iran Contra It seems that either the actual president wasn't involved and elements of the administration got ahead of themselves or things just evolved in a messy way or perhaps the president throught they were doing the "right" thing but it ended up being a mistake. There are very few examples of situations where the president just went out there and knowingly committed a corupt act for his own personal benefit and was caught red handed. Only Nixon and Trump can really claim that distinction and both of them were using their power to try to rig an election. By just waiving the behavior away and sayings it isn't a big deal because "everyone is doing it" kind of provides cover for Trump. Since I know you aren't a Trumpist I know that isn't your intent. I just ask you to look at the evidence and consider how Republicans would act if the shoe were on the other foot. Would they want no witnesses? Would they think it was a perfect call? If you try to put yourself in that mindset of fair mindedness I think you would probably say that Trump committed an impeachable offense, it was a VERY big deal, and he deserves to be removed from office.
  11. You asserted Obama was personally involved in having the IRS target political opponents to win an election. You intimated that every president breaks the law and equivocated Trump's behavior. That simply isn't true and most presidents dont do this. You are trying to minimize and normalize the behavior. The only president who I can think of who did anything similar was Nixon where there was a mountain on evidence.
  12. Take off the tinfoil hat. What evidence does anyone have of this aside from the right wing fever swamp conspiracy theories.
  13. Normalizing Trump's behavior? Sounds line Charlottesville. Which president has traded our national security for PERSONAL gain?
  14. God, how sucky would it be to have to present Trump's case as a lawyer. Now they are arguing executive privlege that hasn't even been asserted...LOL. Schiff and the Dems may or may not be as good of lawyers but having to defend such an open and shut case would be so hard!
  15. Schiff just pointed out false statements by the president's lawyers to say Republicans weren't allowed in the house proceedings. Lying is going to be a bit harder than it usually is for the cons.
×