The Impeachment Thread

[W.TN.Orange Blood]

You're doing it again.

My positions have been pretty consistent, that they don't match up with your black and white views of what partisanship should look like is a you problem. I'm a fiscal conservative that hates government bloat and thinks trump is worthless piece of trash - that you aren't able to reconcile that without screeching is humourous to me.

So......you voted for Hillary because you think Trump is a worthless piece of trash but not Hillary?
Look, they gave us only two choices therein to vote for......some of us didn't like Hillary for President.
There's no sense in being a sore loser about it on a daily basis and calling names.

 

[Septic]

So......you voted for Hillary because you think Trump is a worthless piece of trash but not Hillary?
Look, they gave us only two choices therein to vote for......some of us didn't like Hillary for President.
There's no sense in being a sore loser about it on a daily basis and calling names.

I didn't vote for Hillary. I've repeatedly said I think she's a crook too, you've seen me say it.

This is where you guys keep failing, you create a dichotomy because it's easier for you to reconcile. Life isn't black and white, stop being too intellectually lazy to come to terms with that.

In your lazy world, people who may have conservative qualities but don't fully support your partisan huckster must be the enemy - that's sad.

 

[W.TN.Orange Blood]

I didn't vote for Hillary. I've repeatedly said I think she's a crook too, you've seen me say it.

This is where you guys keep failing, you create a dichotomy because it's easier for you to reconcile. Life isn't black and white, stop being too intellectually lazy to come to terms with that.

In your lazy world, people who may have conservative qualities but don't fully support your partisan huckster must be the enemy - that's sad.

I said "THEY" only gave us TWO (2) nominees to vote for that's all there was. You either vote for one (1) or NOT.
If your side comes up short you'll have to live with it until you have another chance to vote again on someone else.
There's no sense in being hateful & calling horrible names to the side that won that election. Deal with the situation in a civil manner is all & go about your lives in a normal daily routine if you can do that..

 

[AM64]

I did , you weren’t listening , it’s ALL a game for votes . The Republicans didn’t impeach the Dems did this time , for the same reason they screeched about when the Rs did Bill .

And they forget Ole' Bill did an intern. That in the liberal bag of crimes is a big one ... use of position to take advantage of someone with no power to resist, and too naive to understand. That's pretty much the political version of targeting ... the hit on the unaware receiver. That's the instance where abuse of power actually is a crime ... at least currently.

 

[Septic]

I said "THEY" only gave us TWO (2) nominees to vote for that's all there was. You either vote for one (1) or NOT.
If your side comes up short you'll have to live with it until you have another chance to vote again on someone else.
There's no sense in being hateful & calling horrible names to the side that won that election. Deal with the situation in a civil manner is all & go about your lives in a normal daily routine if you can do that..

There were four choices in the 2016 General to choose from, not two. Gary Johnson and Jill Stein were among the other options on the ballot, before you go there - note that your opinion on their viability as legit candidates is irrelevant. You continue to foist a false dichotomy, different from the last - but still, it's horsesht.

Also, 2008 - 2016 called and would love to hear more about your outrage over the indecency you feel the president has been shown.

 

[Matt2496]

If they had "enough evidence" to impeach Trump in the House, why do Democrats still need more witnesses?

 

[Orangeburst]

There were four choices in the 2016 General to choose from, not two. Gary Johnson and Jill Stein were among the other options on the ballot, before you go there - note that your opinion on their viability as legit candidates is irrelevant. You continue to foist a false dichotomy, different from the last - but still, it's horsesht.

Also, 2008 - 2016 called and would love to hear more about your outrage over the indecency you feel the president has been shown.

Why would you vote for Gary Johnson?

 

[UT_VOLS13]

Why would you vote for Gary Johnson?

He likes marijuana.

 

[hog88]

Why would you vote for Gary Johnson?

I've never understood that either. The Libertarian party could be so much more but continuing to run that nut-ball and ignoring local and statewide races they will always be relegated to a laughing stock. I couldn't vote for Hillary or Trump so I pulled the lever for Stein in protest of the crap choices between the Ds, Rs and Ls.

 

[AM64]

House could have went to court to compel their testimony, they didn't feel it was worth the effort so why should the Senate?

The senate should just say no to new witnesses and carry on.

However if they are feeling benevolent. They could ask for the same witnesses the house did plus the Bidens or anybody else they wanted to testify in the house. The WH could say executive privilege, and the senate could say "no time to go to court - elections coming up", and carry on. Dims object, and Mitch says "following precedent - carry on".

 

[hog88]

The senate should just say no to new witnesses and carry on.

However if they are feeling benevolent. They could ask for the same witnesses the house did plus the Bidens or anybody else they wanted to testify in the house. The WH could say executive privilege, and the senate could say "no time to go to court - elections coming up", and carry on. Dims object, and Mitch says "following precedent - carry on".

I think each side should be allotted 4 witnesses, can be anyone. Then watch the dems scramble.

 

[Orangeburst]

I've never understood that either. The Libertarian party could be so much more but continuing to run that nut-ball and ignoring local and statewide races they will always be relegated to a laughing stock. I couldn't vote for Hillary or Trump so I pulled the lever for Stein in protest of the crap choices between the Ds, Rs and Ls.

Septic calls himself a fiscal conservative, but Johnson is a big spender.
As governor from 1995-2003, the budget went from $4.4B to $7.7B. Unless you want to realize it takes to two to do the tango. It is assumed that Trump is a bigger spender than Johnson. Using this metric comparison, Trump would have to have a $7T budget by the time he leaves office to even begin to approach this form of fiscal conservatism.

 

[AM64]

I think each side should be allotted 4 witnesses, can be anyone. Then watch the dems scramble.

I really want them to call the whistle blower for at least two reasons. First, was he/she legally listening to the phone call and in what capacity; and second, did he/she have all the background and other pertinent facts to decide that anything was improper. They also need to cover the issue of coaching and when, where, and who wrote the actual complaint - pretty much like a chain of custody issue to determine who may have tampered with the process.

 

[AM64]

There were four choices in the 2016 General to choose from, not two. Gary Johnson and Jill Stein were among the other options on the ballot, before you go there - note that your opinion on their viability as legit candidates is irrelevant. You continue to foist a false dichotomy, different from the last - but still, it's horsesht.

Also, 2008 - 2016 called and would love to hear more about your outrage over the indecency you feel the president has been shown.

BS, septic. If you want to vote against somebody, then you have to do it in a meaningful way. Gary and Jill were clown shows; a vote for them is like voting "present" - means nothing at all when it comes to winning and losing. Many of us who didn't want Obama to win weren't in any way happy with McCain or Romney as choices - both parties keep providing us worthless choices, and the others offer nothing at all.

 

[luthervol]

I think each side should be allotted 4 witnesses, can be anyone. Then watch the dems scramble.

I agree, and then let Roberts determine which witnesses and questions are actually relevant to the proceedings.

 

[lawgator1]

To summarize where I believe we are at:

For the GOP, they must come up with a way to make the process appear to have been deliberate and complete, even though the process was irrelevant to the outcome.

For the Dems, they must convince people that the reason for the outcome was that the process was not deliberate or complete.

 

[37L1]

To summarize where I believe we are at:

For the GOP, they must come up with a way to make the process appear to have been deliberate and complete, even though the process was irrelevant to the outcome.

For the Dems, they must convince people that the reason for the outcome was that the process was not deliberate or complete.

That incomplete and not deliberate process is the fault of the House of Representatives regarding the investigation that lead to the articles of impeachment and I am already convinced of this.

So what difference, at this point, does it make?

 

[utvolpj]

Septic calls himself a fiscal conservative, but Johnson is a big spender.
As governor from 1995-2003, the budget went from $4.4B to $7.7B. Unless you want to realize it takes to two to do the tango. It is assumed that Trump is a bigger spender than Johnson. Using this metric comparison, Trump would have to have a $7T budget by the time he leaves office to even begin to approach this form of fiscal conservatism.

Misleading figures but the NM governor needs legislative approval for fiscal actions. He vetoed more spending (from a strong dem legislature) than any other.

It's funny to watch "conservatives" attack GJ on spending while ignoring Trump's. He would likely have made a better potus than any party candidate. Regardless, he should have been included in the discussion

 

[W.TN.Orange Blood]

To summarize where I believe we are at:

For the GOP, they must come up with a way to make the process appear to have been deliberate and complete, even though the process was irrelevant to the outcome.

For the Dems, they must convince people that the reason for the outcome was that the process was not deliberate or complete.

 

[Orangeburst]

Misleading figures but the NM governor needs legislative approval for fiscal actions. He vetoed more spending (from a strong dem legislature) than any other.

It's funny to watch "conservatives" attack GJ on spending while ignoring Trump's. He would likely have made a better potus than any party candidate. Regardless, he should have been included in the discussion

It is funny watching your contortionist act. Facts are facts and if GJ received a pass for the legislative process then Trump should as well.
As far as GJ been a better President, that is just your opinion.

 

[37L1]

I really want them to call the whistle blower for at least two reasons. First, was he/she legally listening to the phone call and in what capacity; and second, did he/she have all the background and other pertinent facts to decide that anything was improper. They also need to cover the issue of coaching and when, where, and who wrote the actual complaint - pretty much like a chain of custody issue to determine who may have tampered with the process.

We already know that the WB was not listening to the phone call but got his information second hand. What is more important would be his contact with Schiff/committee members before filing under the WB protection and what his predilection is regarding his political leanings/associations, AKA motivation.

But since his testimony was not needed by the House to file their articles of impeachment, he, along with any other witnesses not involved in the House Investigation that lead to the impeachment are irrelevant. The deliberation should involve only that which was presented by the House and not an iota more. The investigation rests on their shoddy and incomplete work product. That's on them. The articles of impeachment are on trial as much as Trump is.

 

[utvolpj]

It is funny watching your contortionist act. Facts are facts and if GJ received a pass for the legislative process then Trump should as well.
As far as GJ been a better President, that is just your opinion.

the numbers you're using were deliberately misleading and without context.

Why the pass? Trump had a same party legislative branch for 2 years

 

[Orange_Vol1321]

Will only get worse for Trump as the trial proceeds.

All fake.

 

[Orange_Vol1321]

So the polls are fake news again because republicans don't do polls?

I've seen these polls for years, never been contacted once.

 

[hog88]

I agree, and then let Roberts determine which witnesses and questions are actually relevant to the proceedings.

Not the way it works. Roberts has no say in how this trial is ran, he can only enforce the rules the Senate decides on.