Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

modestobulldog

Game Thread: Impeachment Trial

Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, sactowndog said:

I’m not.  I’m saying you have a choice to make or not.   Voting Libertarian is opting out.  It’s your conscience to live with or not, not mine.

I’ll be fine. Politics doesn’t define my conscience.

We’re all sitting in the dugout. Thinking we should pitch. How you gonna throw a shutout when all you do is bitch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Rebelbacker said:

It’s astounding how stupid and partisan you are. 

A simple search would show what laws he broke but you would rather choose to be blind. 

Here is one article detailing his scandals from that noted right wing propaganda machine The Atlantic 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theatlantic.com/amp/article/275960/

Dandy find - still you said the GAO had 41 laws broken 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Rebelbacker said:

It’s astounding how stupid and partisan you are. 

A simple search would show what laws he broke but you would rather choose to be blind. 

Here is one article detailing his scandals from that noted right wing propaganda machine The Atlantic 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theatlantic.com/amp/article/275960/

So if your point is the entire War on Terrorism has been an exercise in executive over reach, you would get no argument from me.   The Executive Branch has been usurping power from the legislative branch for years.   
 

But in most cases, the Executive Branch could at least make the case what they were doing was in the best interest of the country.   The two clear examples of not were Holder using the IRS to target conservative groups and Trump withholding aide to investigate a political rival.  An act for which Holder should be in jail and for which Trump should be impeached.   

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, sactowndog said:

So if your point the entire War on Terrorism has been an exercise in executive over reach.  You would get no argument from me.   The Executive Branch has been usurping power from the legislative branch for years.   
 

But in most cases, the Executive Branch could at least make the case what they were doing was in the best interest of the country.   The two clear examples of not were Holder using the IRS to target conservative groups.  An act for which Holder should be in jail and Trump withholding aide to investigate a political rival.  An act for which he should be impeached.   

 

What aid did the Ukraine not receive that was authorized by Congress? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, UNLV2001 said:

Be like most of America and opt for alcohol over voting !! :cheers:

Have you seen our leading politicians? They’re all decomposing before our eyes. I’m pretty sure America is opting to drink and keep voting. :drunkards:

We’re all sitting in the dugout. Thinking we should pitch. How you gonna throw a shutout when all you do is bitch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, thelawlorfaithful said:

Or vote libertarian again, I’d love for Amash to seek the libertarian nomination. Or none of these candidates in my state. So it’s not all black and white. It’s not like your vote is going to make a difference in how California swings. I on the other hand will be depriving Trump of a right leaning vote in a traditional swing state. 

 

Yes. Most of the states in our conference are already spoken for. No need to stress out about any of our presidential votes. Probably Nevada included. Bernie did good in Nevada last primary and Nevada still went easily Clinton despite berners staying home I suppose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Rocket said:

Most don’t care and those statements were before he took the oath.   Other Republican Senators have made statements post taking the oath.   Again it will be interesting if Schiff moves to have them removed from the process and how Roberts will rule.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, sactowndog said:

Most don’t care and those statements were before he took the oath.   Other Republican Senators have made statements post taking the oath.   Again it will be interesting if Schiff moves to have them removed from the process and how Roberts will rule.   

To answer my own question their is no mechanism to remove nor any expectation of impartiality by either side.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.businessinsider.com/oath-senators-took-for-the-impeachment-trial-means-nothing-2020-1

This article raises a different question of why have an oath.   It’s only value is to reinforce the opinion that the only way to tell you know a politician is lying is when their lips are moving.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest #1Stunner
13 hours ago, SleepingGiantFan said:

+ infinity.

If Americans actually wanted to Drain the Swamp, that is EXACTLY what they would demand. Try all those mofos before SCOTUS and then see if THOSE people actually have any integrity either.

Amen.

Let's do this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, sactowndog said:

Most don’t care and those statements were before he took the oath.   Other Republican Senators have made statements post taking the oath.   Again it will be interesting if Schiff moves to have them removed from the process and how Roberts will rule.   

How presumptuous.

Feel free to enlighten us about those other Republican senators.

I think it's obvious how Robert's will rule, it's ironic that it's his corruption that started all this in the first place. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, sactowndog said:

To answer my own question their is no mechanism to remove nor any expectation of impartiality by either side.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.businessinsider.com/oath-senators-took-for-the-impeachment-trial-means-nothing-2020-1

This article raises a different question of why have an oath.   It’s only value is to reinforce the opinion that the only way to tell you know a politician is lying is when their lips are moving.   

I wouldn't exactly say that it's only value is to call liar liar pants on fire there's consequences when you're in court, ie Clinton

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, sactowndog said:

To answer my own question their is no mechanism to remove nor any expectation of impartiality by either side.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.businessinsider.com/oath-senators-took-for-the-impeachment-trial-means-nothing-2020-1

This article raises a different question of why have an oath.   It’s only value is to reinforce the opinion that the only way to tell you know a politician is lying is when their lips are moving.   

All 100 of these people are intimately familiar with the President and have voiced opinions on him for years. It takes true delusion to expect that not coming into play whatever oath they take. Nor does coming to the conclusion that the president is guilty or not, or that punishment of removal is appropriate or not, is by itself indicative of their non-impartiality. People with opinions can still be impartial, and impartial rubes can still make for an awful jury. What are you gonna do? This is a political question (purely in this case) and political means are how you answer it.

Maybe doing a show investigation that leads to a show trial wasn’t a good idea. :o

We’re all sitting in the dugout. Thinking we should pitch. How you gonna throw a shutout when all you do is bitch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...