Jump to content

The Senate Impeachment Trial of DJT


Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, Gangbusters said:

And the “jury” deemed the defendant innocent before the “trial” even began. Of course they did that once before so no thinking was needed.

Well in America the defendant is supposed to be deemed innocent before the trial begins.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 4.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Oh well, the USA once again chooses to further diminish it's standing in the eyes of the rest of the world.  So be it.

I don't know where to start.  People are dying each day because Trump fucked up.  He refused to face the reality of Covid.  Worst President ever, full stop.  I know I will never spend a nickel at any

Indeed it won't. There are a lot of voices (many people are saying) calling for criminal prosecution after the Republican Senate bows down to Mad King Donald. https://www.thedailybeast.com/forg

Posted Images

14 minutes ago, Gangbusters said:

And the “jury” deemed the defendant innocent before the “trial” even began. Of course they did that once before so no thinking was needed.

Add to that, Jurors met privately with the Defense to offer strategy.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Bus Driver said:

Add to that, Jurors met privately with the Defense to offer strategy.  

Leading to the observation that almost all of us have understood; impeachment is a political process rather than a trial.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, learningJ24 said:

Leading to the observation that almost all of us have understood; impeachment is a political process rather than a trial.  

Oh, I get that.  Don't you find it odd that someone who swears "I solemnly swear (or affirm, as the case may be,) that in all things appertaining to the trial of the impeachment of , now pending, I will do impartial justice according to the Constitution and laws: so help me God." would meet with the defense in private?

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, learningJ24 said:

Leading to the observation that almost all of us have understood; impeachment is a political process rather than a trial.  

Nakedly political.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What @dog and other Trump apologists fail to understand, is that seven Republican Senators are braving the worst of their party's ire because the House Managers  _did_ prove their case and voted that, as McConnell said, Trump is practically and morally guilty of trying to overthrow the results of our national election by courting and threatening public officials, lying to the nation and contributing to and failing to prevent or defeat an insurrection.

The only way to national unity is for the GOP to reject Trump. 

Otherwise, there is no obvious way forward for substantive legislation if the GOP refuses to reject politics of hate and division. Get rid of the filibuster and lets get back to work. The GOP is led by those who hate America and our ideals. Make them irrelevant by helping Texas through its current emergency, and convince more mayors and governors that the US government is open and ready for business.

From the Miami Herald, "Suarez, elected mayor in 2017, said it was an “incredibly spirited conversation” and called it “wonderfully productive.” He said he has already spoken more to Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris during their first month in office than he did the Trump administration in its entirety."

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

An impeachment manager says Republicans privately told her she made a compelling case to convict Trump, but they acquitted him anyway 

"The response was, 'Well, I don't think you'll get to 17, so I'll never get to that second disqualification vote and I don't want to stand out on a limb by myself,'" Plaskett recalled, referring to Democratic senators' needing 17 Republicans to vote with them in order to convict Trump.

 

And, yet, 7 did.  The fear of the rest of being targeted by their own party is being proven to be justified.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Bus Driver said:

An impeachment manager says Republicans privately told her she made a compelling case to convict Trump, but they acquitted him anyway 

"The response was, 'Well, I don't think you'll get to 17, so I'll never get to that second disqualification vote and I don't want to stand out on a limb by myself,'" Plaskett recalled, referring to Democratic senators' needing 17 Republicans to vote with them in order to convict Trump.

 

And, yet, 7 did.  The fear of the rest of being targeted by their own party is being proven to be justified.

How should we expect them to vote in a proceeding they believe was unconstitutional?

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, phillysailor said:

What @dog and other Trump apologists fail to understand, is that seven Republican Senators are braving the worst of their party's ire because the House Managers  _did_ prove their case and voted that, as McConnell said, Trump is practically and morally guilty of trying to overthrow the results of our national election by courting and threatening public officials, lying to the nation and contributing to and failing to prevent or defeat an insurrection.

The only way to national unity is for the GOP to reject Trump. 

Otherwise, there is no obvious way forward for substantive legislation if the GOP refuses to reject politics of hate and division. Get rid of the filibuster and lets get back to work. The GOP is led by those who hate America and our ideals. Make them irrelevant by helping Texas through its current emergency, and convince more mayors and governors that the US government is open and ready for business.

From the Miami Herald, "Suarez, elected mayor in 2017, said it was an “incredibly spirited conversation” and called it “wonderfully productive.” He said he has already spoken more to Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris during their first month in office than he did the Trump administration in its entirety."

 

The defense demonstrated conclusively that Democrats, including members of the jury, had done themselves what Trump did. They should have charged him with some offense related to his inaction after the assault began.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Dog said:

How should we expect them to vote in a proceeding they believe was unconstitutional?

If they truly, honestly believed the proceeding was unconstitutional, they should not have voted at all.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Dog said:

The defense demonstrated conclusively that Democrats, including members of the jury, had done themselves what Trump did. They should have charged him with some offense related to his inaction after the assault began.

whataboutism has never been a substantive defense. But, its your stock in trade.

Once again, you are trying to blame Democrats for all things Trump. According to you, the GOP never bears any responsibility for their actions or statements because they are just victims of Democrats. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Mrleft8 said:

If they truly, honestly believed the proceeding was unconstitutional, they should not have voted at all.

Nowhere in the article I linked did the Republicans say to Rep. Plaskett they felt it was unconstitutional.

Of course, the question raised by Senator McConnell regrading the Constitutionality of an Impeachment trial of someone no longer in office was entirely his own doing.  He refused to accept the Article prior to the Senate returning from recess on January 19, thus ensuring time ran out.  Purely political gamesmanship.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, phillysailor said:

whataboutism has never been a substantive defense. But, its your stock in trade.

Once again, you are trying to blame Democrats for all things Trump. According to you, the GOP never bears any responsibility for their actions or statements because they are just victims of Democrats. 

Apparently whataboutism like doctored evidence is fine in a political process like this.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Bus Driver said:

Nowhere in the article I linked did the Republicans say to Rep. Plaskett they felt it was unconstitutional.

Of course, the question raised by Senator McConnell regrading the Constitutionality of an Impeachment trial of someone no longer in office was entirely his own doing.  He refused to accept the Article prior to the Senate returning from recess on January 19, thus ensuring time ran out.  Purely political gamesmanship.

Constitutionality was the very first issue they voted on.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Bus Driver said:

I have a hunch he would love to testify.  He seems to believe he is so much smarter than everyone else.  

It would be interesting if he were to testify.  Probably wouldn't be too hard to lead him right into his own "You're goddamned right I ordered the Code Red" moment.

Has he ever testififed for anything under oath??  You preying to the sky ferry if you think for one instant he will.  There is no way in hell his lawyers will ever let that happen...  

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Dog said:

Apparently whataboutism like doctored evidence is fine in a political process like this.

That's your takeaway from Trump supporters assaulting our Capitol. That Democrats are bad people.

I can't think of a less relevant, more blind comment regarding our most dangerous national security threat of the last decade. Our nation's leaders were moments away from being captured by an angry mob that, in its own words and actions, was carrying out instructions from our president to overturn the results of our presidential election, and you're playing word games.

You are a lightweight fool with no sense of priority.

But why do you hate America?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, phillysailor said:

That's your takeaway from Trump supporters assaulting our Capitol. That Democrats are bad people.

I can't think of a less relevant, more blind comment regarding our most dangerous national security threat of the last decade. Our nation's leaders were moments away from being captured by an angry mob that, in its own words and actions, was carrying out instructions from our president to overturn the results of our presidential election, and you're playing word games.

You are a lightweight fool with no sense of priority.

But why do you hate America?

Focus....The question before the senate was whether or not Trump's actions constituted incitement, not whether the assault was or Democrats are bad.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Dog said:

Focus....The question before the senate was whether or not Trump's actions constituted incitement, not whether the assault was or Democrats are bad.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Dog said:

Focus....The question before the senate was whether or not Trump's actions constituted incitement, not whether the assault was or Democrats are bad.

Your myopia is not my problem. It's America's problem that you and your ilk cannot see that failing to hold the country more important than one man has divided us as a nation. 

Trump remains a national security threat, as is the current version of the GOP.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, phillysailor said:

Your myopia is not my problem. It's America's problem that you and your ilk cannot see that failing to hold the country more important than one man has divided us as a nation. 

Trump remains a national security threat, as is the current version of the GOP.

You seem to think that considerations other than guilt or innocence of the actual charges should drive the verdict. That's not how it's done in America, at least not yet.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, d'ranger said:

Has he bombed Pearl Harbor yet?  I just dropped in to see what condition his condition was in.

I'm fine thanks. Where does that line come form? it rings a bell.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Fakenews said:

Featured in a lot of Vietnam movies.  Kenny Rodgers covered it.

Kenny Rogers was the guitarist for the 1st Edition.

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Dog said:

You seem to think that considerations other than guilt or innocence of the actual charges should drive the verdict. That's not how it's done in America, at least not yet.

Interesting.  I remember a recent case where the charges drove a verdict, the process was followed, yet in the end 'other considerations' stepped in.

I guess you only remember things that support your arguments. "Not Yet" indeed.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Grrr... said:

Interesting.  I remember a recent case where the charges drove a verdict, the process was followed, yet in the end 'other considerations' stepped in.

I guess you only remember things that support your arguments.

I remember it well. The prosecution illegally withheld exculpatory evidence.

Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, d'ranger said:

Has he bombed Pearl Harbor yet?  I just dropped in to see what condition his condition was in.

He’s waiting for the Germans

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Dog said:

And should we be surprised that those who voted no didn't (with one exception) vote to convict?

Nope.  Before they even received the Article in the Senate, many went public with their intention to vote "Not Guilty".  Hardly the impartiality they swore to in the oath they later took. 

While they will never admit to being scared, it is clear the folks who voted to convict are being targeted by their own party.  In the case of Rep. Kinzinger, it's his own family.

The devotion to the defeated ex-President is quite strong.  It may well spell the death of the GOP.

Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Dog said:
1 hour ago, phillysailor said:

Your myopia is not my problem. It's America's problem that you and your ilk cannot see that failing to hold the country more important than one man has divided us as a nation. 

Trump remains a national security threat, as is the current version of the GOP.

You seem to think that considerations other than guilt or innocence of the actual charges should drive the verdict. That's not how it's done in America, at least not yet.

Once again, you're trying to argue that was a criminal trial, and that all aspects not related to the defense need to follow such rules and limitations.

It's ok, it's just proven that you aren't patriotic enough to understand what is good for the country may not be good for Donald Trump's political and personal goals. You've put him and his wants ahead of the country.

Why do you hate America and love Donald Trump?

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Bus Driver said:

Nope.  Before they even received the Article in the Senate, many went public with their intention to vote "Not Guilty".  Hardly the impartiality they swore to in the oath they later took. 

While they will never admit to being scared, it is clear the folks who voted to convict are being targeted by their own party.  In the case of Rep. Kinzinger, it's his own family.

The devotion to the defeated ex-President is quite strong.  It may well spell the death of the GOP.

Fine with me if death is confined to the GOP and the rest of us are not collateral damage.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, jerseyguy said:
32 minutes ago, Bus Driver said:

Nope.  Before they even received the Article in the Senate, many went public with their intention to vote "Not Guilty".  Hardly the impartiality they swore to in the oath they later took. 

While they will never admit to being scared, it is clear the folks who voted to convict are being targeted by their own party.  In the case of Rep. Kinzinger, it's his own family.

The devotion to the defeated ex-President is quite strong.  It may well spell the death of the GOP.

Fine with me if death is confined to the GOP and the rest of us are not collateral damage.

I have no real qualm with Republicans.  We may disagree, but that is to be expected.

I do, however, have a huge problem with the Trumpublican Party.

They are not even close to the same thing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Bus Driver said:

I have no real qualm with Republicans.  We may disagree, but that is to be expected.

I do, however, have a huge problem with the Trumpublican Party.

They are not even close to the same thing.

I know of no Trumplican who voted for a Democrat

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Sol Rosenberg said:

DemocRATS are the enemy. Their elections are always fraudulent. 

It took a Japanese soldier 29 years to finally realize Japan lost.

I think some "Trumpers" may try to beat that record.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Bus Driver said:

Oh, I get that.  Don't you find it odd that someone who swears "I solemnly swear (or affirm, as the case may be,) that in all things appertaining to the trial of the impeachment of , now pending, I will do impartial justice according to the Constitution and laws: so help me God." would meet with the defense in private?

I knew you did, it was the deliberately ignorant canine I was referring to.  To be honest, I'm not sure the meeting would be odd or not.  The process was designed to be political so meeting to discuss political issues MAY be in bounds.  Obviously, in this case, it was. If half of the Senate is this locked in, this was the appropriate, if not just, result.  If the action was truly bipartisan, the result would have been as it was in Nixon's case; resign and go away. Reading the preceding and discussions after the Constitution was ratified indicated how formless this process was and why.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Ishmael said:

Every time wardodo posts in a thread it loses 50 IQ points. Fuuuuck he's stupid.

I finally had to put him on my ignore list last night. His stupid was seeping out of my computer monitor, and beginning to corrode the keyboard.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Bus Driver said:

I have no real qualm with Republicans.  We may disagree, but that is to be expected.

I do, however, have a huge problem with the Trumpublican Party.

They are not even close to the same thing.

Again, what percentage of republicans support Trump?   Yes, with the exception of a few outliers that really stand out, they are the same thing.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, phillysailor said:

Once again, you're trying to argue that was a criminal trial, and that all aspects not related to the defense need to follow such rules and limitations.

It's ok, it's just proven that you aren't patriotic enough to understand what is good for the country may not be good for Donald Trump's political and personal goals. You've put him and his wants ahead of the country.

Why do you hate America and love Donald Trump?

And you're arguing that Trump should have been found guilty because it would be "good for the country". That's a perversion, it's un-American.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Dogster is falling behind on his Reich-Wing talking points . . 

Because his lidder said so, he is supposed to claim that it was Antifa that stormed the capitol. 

But wait, now Carlson says it's all the fault of BLM . . 

The Reich seems to have trouble getting their lies straight. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, AJ Oliver said:

The Dogster is falling behind on his Reich-Wing talking points . . 

Because his lidder said so, he is supposed to claim that it was Antifa that stormed the capitol. 

But wait, now Carlson says it's all the fault of BLM . . 

The Reich seems to have trouble getting their lies straight. 

I don't believe Carlson said anything like that...cite please.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Dog said:

I don't believe Carlson said anything like that...cite please.

No how no way - you have long since forfeited your right to polite responses 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Gouvernail said:

The impeachment trial is over.

the psychopath was impeached. 
 

The Republicans don’t mind if POTUS do bad things. 

The impeachment put the entire Republican party on trial.  They lost.  Their moral rot has now been exposed to every American voter. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Gouvernail said:

The impeachment trial is over.

the psychopath was impeached. 
 

The Republicans don’t mind if POTUS do bad things. 

As long as the POTUS is on the right "team".  

If the House flips, watch for the Impeachments to come flying out of that chamber.

Senator Graham has already signaled who would be targeted.  That would be VP Harris, and it's based on a lie.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Rain Man said:

The impeachment put the entire Republican party on trial.  They lost.  Their moral rot has now been exposed to every American voter. 

Problem is, a large chunk of Americans view moral rot as an asset. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Sean said:

Problem is, a large chunk of Americans view moral rot as an asset. 

This could easily be summed up with just one word "Democrat". :D

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Dog said:

Constitutionality was the very first issue they voted on.

And they voted that it was in fact constitutional. If a senator (jurist) does not agree with that, too fucking bad. You were elected to a position you sought, do the tasks that go with the responsibility.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Venom said:

This could easily be summed up with just one word "Democrat". :D

Democratic candidates do differ from authoritarian dicks.  You knew that, right?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, hasher said:

Democratic candidates do differ from authoritarian dicks.  You knew that, right?

Cancel culture much halfwit? :D

  • Downvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Cancelling racist, sexist and hateful ideologies remains a full time job.  You should register at the DOJ.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Dog said:

The defense demonstrated conclusively that Democrats, including members of the jury, had done themselves what Trump did. They should have charged him with some offense related to his inaction after the assault began.

Trump loves you and thinks you're very special. Trump wants you to remember this day and go in peace

In order to believe Trump is innocent of plotting and inciting insurrection, you have to believe a long list of things from his constant outbursts about election fraud, months before the election is held, his string of lawsuits, his courting of the violent alt-right, his replacing Acting Sec.of the Army Esper with a more compliant Acting Sec. who issued orders that National Guard -not- be deployed with his personal approval, to his meetings with alt-right leaders after the election, his public messages about overturning the election, his actual speech, and his phone calls and tweets during the insurrection itself (after being told VP Pence was in danger), were all totally unconnected with the events of Jan 6th.

And you have to ignore the fact that he failed to even attempt his Constitutional duty as President.

In order to believe Trump is innocent, you have to be loyal to Trump above being loyal to your country.

- DSK

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Steam Flyer said:

Trump loves you and thinks you're very special. Trump wants you to remember this day and go in peace

In order to believe Trump is innocent of plotting and inciting insurrection, you have to believe a long list of things from his constant outbursts about election fraud, months before the election is held, his string of lawsuits, his courting of the violent alt-right, his replacing Acting Sec.of the Army Esper with a more compliant Acting Sec. who issued orders that National Guard -not- be deployed with his personal approval, to his meetings with alt-right leaders after the election, his public messages about overturning the election, his actual speech, and his phone calls and tweets during the insurrection itself (after being told VP Pence was in danger), were all totally unconnected with the events of Jan 6th.

And you have to ignore the fact that he failed to even attempt his Constitutional duty as President.

In order to believe Trump is innocent, you have to be loyal to Trump above being loyal to your country.

- DSK

Or a complete Moran.

image.png.168e7fb1566650a083549e2244fc4d34.png

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Dog said:

And you're arguing that Trump should have been found guilty because it would be "good for the country". That's a perversion, it's un-American.

So "the good of the country" is unamerican?

The purpose of the impeachment process is for the good of the country!

Dumbass.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Bus Driver said:

Not sure the detail is charged with keeping him away from law enforcement.  As I understand it, they protect him from attacks.  A court order is different, IMHO.

The issue isn't that, it's the practical issue of an SS detail guarding him in prison. They are guarding what he knows as much as him. Technically speaking, the guy has been read-in on every US secret there is. Even though he could spill his guts at any time to anyone, he is entitled by an act of Congress to protection. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mark K said:

The issue isn't that, it's the practical issue of an SS detail guarding him in prison. They are guarding what he knows as much as him. Technically speaking, the guy has been read-in on every US secret there is. Even though he could spill his guts at any time to anyone, he is entitled by an act of Congress to protection. 

A Supermax will protect him just fine.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Dog said:
11 hours ago, phillysailor said:

Once again, you're trying to argue that was a criminal trial, and that all aspects not related to the defense need to follow such rules and limitations.

It's ok, it's just proven that you aren't patriotic enough to understand what is good for the country may not be good for Donald Trump's political and personal goals. You've put him and his wants ahead of the country.

Why do you hate America and love Donald Trump?

And you're arguing that Trump should have been found guilty because it would be "good for the country". That's a perversion, it's un-American.

Once again, you can’t be bothered to read carefully.

I was defending the process by which Our loser ex-president was impeached, and tried, according to our Constitution as interpreted by the US Senate.

You were, again, apologizing for Trump and saying his needs and wants weren’t met by the process.

Following the Constitution and defending democracy is “good for America” no matter how much Trump whines and wants things to go his way.

You’ve chosen to be Trumps champion, even when he attacks our democracy. So don’t think you’ve the stature to call anyone unAmerican, since you obviously put him first, not your own country.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Mark K said:

The issue isn't that, it's the practical issue of an SS detail guarding him in prison. They are guarding what he knows as much as him. Technically speaking, the guy has been read-in on every US secret there is. Even though he could spill his guts at any time to anyone, he is entitled by an act of Congress to protection. 

Trump isn't wasn't ever smart enough to absorb any information worth guarding. He's so dumb, he bragged about his affairs in public, until his lawyers told him to STFU.

And even then he couldn't stop, but ten minutes after he bragged, he denied that he'd said anything. The man is a fucking moron (Moran).

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Ease the sheet. said:

So "the good of the country" is unamerican?

The purpose of the impeachment process is for the good of the country!

Dumbass.

 

 

The good of the country is served by a process that seeks to determine if the defendant is guilty as charged. It's not good for the country to convict because it is seen by some as “good for the country”. That's a corruption of the system, it's what tyrants do.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Dog said:

The good of the country is served by a process that seeks to determine if the defendant is guilty as charged. It's not good for the country to convict because it is seen by some as “good for the country”. That's a corruption of the system, it's what tyrants do.

Do you know the bible?  It is a text of moral philosophy. Moses killed an Egyptian.  David killed one of his generals to take the man's wife.  His wife was the mother of Solomon.  And on into infinity...

Forgiveness is an important part of the story.

Most Kings are wicked.  You know the old adage, that thing about power...

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dog said:

The good of the country is served by a process that seeks to determine if the defendant is guilty as charged. It's not good for the country to convict because it is seen by some as “good for the country”. That's a corruption of the system, it's what tyrants do.

Kind of agree , But in this case the Juror was probably rigged, I find it sick  that that mostly all elected almost always vote on party lines,

It should have been a secret vote, with no party mentioned, As a matter of fact once a person is elected their party affiliation should be drop from their title and all government policies/laws voted should be yes or no, then elected officials could vote  their conscience for  the good of Americans , not the PARTY

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, phillysailor said:

Once again, you can’t be bothered to read carefully.

I was defending the process by which Our loser ex-president was impeached, and tried, according to our Constitution as interpreted by the US Senate.

You were, again, apologizing for Trump and saying his needs and wants weren’t met by the process.

Following the Constitution and defending democracy is “good for America” no matter how much Trump whines and wants things to go his way.

You’ve chosen to be Trumps champion, even when he attacks our democracy. So don’t think you’ve the stature to call anyone unAmerican, since you obviously put him first, not your own country.

And yet, "Good of the Country" is the purpose of impeachment, which is why it is a political process and the penalties are so low. It's a feature, not a bug.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dog said:

The good of the country is served by a process that seeks to determine if the defendant is guilty as charged. It's not good for the country to convict because it is seen by some as “good for the country”. That's a corruption of the system, it's what tyrants do.

Tell that to the founding fathers.

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Not for nothing said:

Kind of agree , But in this case the Juror was probably rigged, I find it sick  that that mostly all elected almost always vote on party lines,

It should have been a secret vote, with no party mentioned, As a matter of fact once a person is elected their party affiliation should be drop from their title and all government policies/laws voted should be yes or no, then elected officials could vote  their conscience for  the good of Americans , not the PARTY

 

There were no parties.

 

Even now, you can argue there's presently 2 factions of 1 party....

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Ishmael said:

A dry-cleaning bag would probably be enough, as long as he was sedated.

an Urn would be better ;-) 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ease the sheet. said:

There were no parties.

 

Even now, you can argue there's presently 2 factions of 1 party....

even more reason to get rid of the titles

During the CNN town hall, Biden refers to Trump as "the former guy."

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/16/2021 at 6:48 AM, learningJ24 said:

Leading to the observation that almost all of us have understood; impeachment is a political process rather than a trial.  

Of course it is, and the Constitution apparently meant for it to be such, rather than a criminal trial.   Haven't we discussed that to death, about two thousand posts earlier in this very thread?

Three impeachments now in my lifetime, almost four (Nixon).  Clinton, "acquitted" (maybe the term in a non-criminal proceeding should be "not proven"?)

Nixon would've been impeached, and deserved it.

Clinton, nuh-uh, sure it was unseemly and he was being cute with the facts ("what the meaning of is, is"---clever but smarmy and immature ).  As Chris Rock summed it up, "he lied about a blowjob 'cause he didn't want his wife to find out".  Yup, that was about it.  Impeachment proceeding was overkill.

Trump first impeachment: mostly hot air, does anyone remember without googling it what the two charges were?  The "case" was thin, and acquittal was the right call imho. It was largely a waste of time.

Trump second impeachment:  Justified, take a look at the Dem videos and arguments.  And the R defense was mostly the the out-of-office, for which there was some precedent, but none involving a president.  Now there is such a precedent.  The country needed to get this out in the open, it was ugly for sure.  Though part of me thinks a conviction would have been worse for the country, would've made Trump a martyr to too many, and made big polarization into  mega-polarization.  Not what we need now, what we need is more calm and some semi-boredom. Leave him to whatever the electorate decides if he runs again, I'm willing to trust the voters. And to whatever civil or criminal trials come out of wherever.  Let's try to move on, and not have Trump take up so much of everyone's mental bandwidth.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't disagree with much of what you've said.  However, I do think that letting Clinton off the hook set the stage for the partisan nature of the Trump impeachments.  If I get caught banging an employee, I'm getting fired.  If I commit perjury, it's a felony and I'm probably going to jail.  Why aren't we holding our representatives to the same standard?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites