Donald Trump

[DeadLinesman]

5 minutes ago, CaaC (John) said:

Not one for arguing or having long debates about politics here or aboard but will this episode of impeachment be a new thing now in America, someone is elected as President of the United States and then the opposition parties start digging up shite for an impeachment.

Just wondering at the next election, say Trump fails in his bid for a second term and a Democrat wins and becomes President, what will we see, the Republican Party starts to dig up shit for an impeachment? a never-ending story in American politics.

PS I still don't like the toupee walking idiot in Donald Duck.  

Presidents have always been allowed to be impeached, but it’s only ever happened 3 times. It won’t become the norm, but Trump literally hides behind the whole of the GOP. It’s amazing how he’s so innocent, but they don’t want witnesses to testify.....

[Harry]

9 hours ago, CaaC (John) said:

Not one for arguing or having long debates about politics here or aboard but will this episode of impeachment be a new thing now in America, someone is elected as President of the United States and then the opposition parties start digging up shite for an impeachment.

Just wondering at the next election, say Trump fails in his bid for a second term and a Democrat wins and becomes President, what will we see, the Republican Party starts to dig up shit for an impeachment? a never-ending story in American politics.

PS I still don't like the toupee walking idiot in Donald Duck.  

Maybe. Republicans were chomping at the bit for an opportunity to impeach Obama, and if Hillary Clinton had won in 2016 she almost certainly would have been impeached, despite the fact that both Benghazi and the email server matters were dragged through numerous congressional investigations and she complied with all of them and they did not churn out anything conclusive. The Clinton foundation would be my guess of the cause.

The democrats have been late to the party in the hostility stakes but they are getting worse to with the likes of "the squad" going viral with tea party like extremeness. 

The Bill Clinton impeachment seems to be the point where American politics soured in a way that it hasn't recovered.

And the Bush Gore election in 2000 where Fox News reported Florida as a Republican win when all others were reporting a Democrat win was the moment the media interference really got ugly. Media institutions have been reporting "their" truth, rather than "the" truth ever since, in increasingly bad ways which increasingly polarises the country leaning both sides divided and viewing the other as illegitimate.

[Dr. Gonzo]

I just don't understand how you can maintain innocence yet not present a single piece of evidence to prove your innocence, against the ample evidence of wrongdoing. And I think it's just sad that the party, for the most part, just falls in line and ignores even the prospect of holding a fair trial - particularly when there's people in the Senate that were a part of the last impeachment proceedings with Bill Clinton.

[Beelzebub]

He'll win again in 2020

[Harry]

12 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

I just don't understand how you can maintain innocence yet not present a single piece of evidence to prove your innocence, against the ample evidence of wrongdoing. And I think it's just sad that the party, for the most part, just falls in line and ignores even the prospect of holding a fair trial - particularly when there's people in the Senate that were a part of the last impeachment proceedings with Bill Clinton.

Agreed.

Anyone with a soul should have left the Republican party by now. It deserves a generation in electoral obscurity and to have to completely reinvent itself to win back intelligent centrist voters.

[Harry]

3 hours ago, Azeem said:

He'll win again in 2020

If Sanders is his opponent I agree.

Biden or Buttigieg might do something different. Don't forget 75% of the country wanted witnesses at the impeachment trial. 

[Dr. Gonzo]

8 hours ago, Harry said:

If Sanders is his opponent I agree.

Biden or Buttigieg might do something different. Don't forget 75% of the country wanted witnesses at the impeachment trial. 

I get the feeling Biden would result in low democratic turnout like 2016 with Hilary.

Everyone I talk to that’s voting in the democratic primary, from moderate to really left leaning, say “I’ll vote for him as the nominee, but I hope he doesn’t win the nomination.” In my anecdotal evidence of a very small sample size, it seems moderates greatly prefer the billionaires - Bloomberg and Steyer. The ones who are more focused on “experience” point to the fact he was mayor of America’s biggest city. The ones that care more about the environment are more pro-Steyer. The left leaning people on the other hand are between Warren and Sanders.

I do think more in the midwest, Buttigieg and Biden will have a better chance, so you’re probably right that those states rather than the ones like California, who’ll likely go with a Democrat regardless.

But I do think what makes Biden so popular is his association with Obama. And every time he opens his mouth he reminds voters why he’d never won the nomination the other times he’s run (which is like 3 or 4 times). I think democratic voter turnout is the key to this election - look at Obama’s turnouts vs Hilary’s. I think that requires someone that inspires voters with their message rather than someone who’s campaign really amounts to “well I’m not Trump”

[6666]

9 hours ago, Harry said:

If Sanders is his opponent I agree.

Biden or Buttigieg might do something different. Don't forget 75% of the country wanted witnesses at the impeachment trial. 

Biden will do something different? 

[Dr. Gonzo]

The turd remains unflushed thanks to his friends in the Senate.

[Harry]

Respect to Mitt Romney

[Fairy In Boots]

Lol it’s almost Sir Balon and Brexit delusional levels for some on this impeachment lark. 

It was/is highly embarrassing to anyone with a passing interest outside of the us who isn’t triggered by Trump. The whole idea that this was genuinely going to happen has been laugable. 

 

[Dr. Gonzo]

I'm pretty sure throughout the entire time he's been impeached all of us on here who want rid of him (because he's a disgrace to the western world) knew he was always going to be acquitted. It's just pretty shameless how the republicans have conducted a "trial" without seeing the relevant documents and hearing from the witnesses with eyewitness testimony who said they wanted to testify.

[Harry]

‘The president is guilty’: Mitt Romney’s speech on his vote to convict Trump, annotated

By Amber Phillips 
Feb. 6, 2020 at 6:37 a.m. GMT+11

Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah) is expected to be the only Republican senator to vote Wednesday to convict president Trump on the impeachment charge of abuse of power. That is a blow to the president’s argument that this was an entirely partisan process driven by Democrats who want him out of office.

Below are Romney’s prepared remarks announcing his vote, with our annotations via Genius. Click on the highlighted text to read them.

 

 

The Constitution is at the foundation of our Republic’s success, and we each strive not to lose sight of our promise to defend it. The Constitution established the vehicle of impeachment that has occupied both houses of Congress for these many days. We have labored to faithfully execute our responsibilities to it. We have arrived at different judgments, but I hope we respect each other’s good faith

The allegations made in the articles of impeachment are very serious. As a Senator-juror, I swore an oath, before God, to exercise “impartial justice.” I am a profoundly religious person. I take an oath before God as enormously consequential. I knew from the outset that being tasked with judging the president, the leader of my own party, would be the most difficult decision I have ever faced. I was not wrong.

The House managers presented evidence supporting their case; the White House counsel disputed that case. In addition, the president’s team presented three defenses: first, that there can be no impeachment without a statutory crime; second, that the Bidens’ conduct justified the president’s actions; and third that the judgment of the president’s actions should be left to the voters. Let me first address each of those defenses.

The historic meaning of the words “high crimes and misdemeanors,” the writings of the Founders and my own reasoned judgment convince me that a president can indeed commit acts against the public trust that are so egregious that while they are not statutory crimes, they would demand removal from office. To maintain that the lack of a codified and comprehensive list of all the outrageous acts that a president might conceivably commit renders Congress powerless to remove a president defies reason.

AD

The president’s counsel noted that Vice president Biden appeared to have a conflict of interest when he undertook an effort to remove the Ukrainian prosecutor general. If he knew of the exorbitant compensation his son was receiving from a company actually under investigation, the Vice president should have recused himself. While ignoring a conflict of interest is not a crime, it is surely very wrong.

With regards to Hunter Biden, taking excessive advantage of his father’s name is unsavory but also not a crime. Given that in neither the case of the father nor the son was any evidence presented by the president’s counsel that a crime had been committed, the president’s insistence that they be investigated by the Ukrainians is hard to explain other than as a political pursuit. There is no question in my mind that were their names not Biden, the president would never have done what he did.

The defense argues that the Senate should leave the impeachment decision to the voters. While that logic is appealing to our democratic instincts, it is inconsistent with the Constitution’s requirement that the Senate, not the voters, try the president. Hamilton explained that the Founders’ decision to invest senators with this obligation rather than leave it to voters was intended to minimize—to the extent possible—the partisan sentiments of the public.

AD

This verdict is ours to render. The people will judge us for how well and faithfully we fulfilled our duty. The grave question the Constitution tasks senators to answer is whether the president committed an act so extreme and egregious that it rises to the level of a “high crime and misdemeanor.”

Yes, he did.

The president asked a foreign government to investigate his political rival.

The president withheld vital military funds from that government to press it to do so.

The president delayed funds for an American ally at war with Russian invaders.

The president’s purpose was personal and political.

Accordingly, the president is guilty of an appalling abuse of the public trust.

AD

What he did was not “perfect." No, it was a flagrant assault on our electoral rights, our national security interests, and our fundamental values. Corrupting an election to keep oneself in office is perhaps the most abusive and destructive violation of one’s oath of office that I can imagine.

In the last several weeks, I have received numerous calls and texts. Many demand that, in their words, “I stand with the team.” I can assure you that that thought has been very much on my mind. I support a great deal of what the president has done. I have voted with him 80 percent of the time. But my promise before God to apply impartial justice required that I put my personal feelings and biases aside. Were I to ignore the evidence that has been presented, and disregard what I believe my oath and the Constitution demands of me for the sake of a partisan end, it would, I fear, expose my character to history’s rebuke and the censure of my own conscience.

I am aware that there are people in my party and in my state who will strenuously disapprove of my decision, and in some quarters, I will be vehemently denounced. I am sure to hear abuse from the president and his supporters. Does anyone seriously believe I would consent to these consequences other than from an inescapable conviction that my oath before God demanded it of me?

AD

I sought to hear testimony from John Bolton not only because I believed he could add context to the charges, but also because I hoped that what he said might raise reasonable doubt and thus remove from me the awful obligation to vote for impeachment.

Like each member of this deliberative body, I love our country. I believe that our Constitution was inspired by Providence. I am convinced that freedom itself is dependent on the strength and vitality of our national character. As it is with each senator, my vote is an act of conviction. We have come to different conclusions, fellow senators, but I trust we have all followed the dictates of our conscience.

I acknowledge that my verdict will not remove the president from office. The results of this Senate court will in fact be appealed to a higher court: the judgment of the American people. Voters will make the final decision, just as the president’s lawyers have implored. My vote will likely be in the minority in the Senate. But irrespective of these things, with my vote, I will tell my children and their children that I did my duty to the best of my ability, believing that my country expected it of me. I will only be one name among many, no more or less, to future generations of Americans who look at the record of this trial. They will note merely that I was among the senators who determined that what the president did was wrong, grievously wrong.

We’re all footnotes at best in the annals of history. But in the most powerful nation on earth, the nation conceived in liberty and justice, that is distinction enough for any citizen

[Harry]

9 hours ago, Fairy In Boots said:

Lol it’s almost Sir Balon and Brexit delusional levels for some on this impeachment lark. 

It was/is highly embarrassing to anyone with a passing interest outside of the us who isn’t triggered by Trump. The whole idea that this was genuinely going to happen has been laugable. 

Yeah nobody at all that's posted here thought he'd be removed via impeachment (though I did think witnesses would possibly happen). However I'd be fairly confident in suggesting the reason he didn't get impeached is because Republican voters largely stuck by him. McConnell would knife trump in an alley if he could but the people aren't with him so he continues to do his job for trump with ruthless efficiency.

[DeadLinesman]

9 hours ago, Fairy In Boots said:

Lol it’s almost Sir Balon and Brexit delusional levels for some on this impeachment lark. 

It was/is highly embarrassing to anyone with a passing interest outside of the us who isn’t triggered by Trump. The whole idea that this was genuinely going to happen has been laugable. 

 

Don’t think anyone thought it actually would happen. Bit like Boris and his business mistress. Complete abuse of power, but swept under the rug.

[Cicero]

I’m so surprised 

[Harry]

 

Romney is a Democrat who infiltrated the GOP to run against Obama in 2012 and throw the election. Or something.

[Harry]

4 hours ago, Cicero said:

I’m so surprised 

In what way?

[Cicero]

1 minute ago, Harry said:

In what way?

Let me try again 

Im so surprised 

[Dr. Gonzo]

I almost feel bad for Mitt Romney. He's not really well liked by the left for being the face of the GOP in 2012 and seeming like the ultimate American corporate shill. But he's voted with his conscience in the face of a "trial" where the jury basically had predetermined they wouldn't consider evidence and knew how they would vote - and he'd probably asked the question "why would someone who claims to be innocent present no facts to demonstrate they are innocent?" And his reward is to basically find himself an outsider in his own party, with his own niece (the head of the RNC) calling for him to leave the party for showing loyalty to the law of his country over his party.

Still think he's a representation of corporate shilling dickheadedness though.

I think more commendable is the 3 Democratic senators in deeply Red states (Sinema from AZ, Manchin from West Virginia - a state that Trump won by something ridiculous like 47 points, and Doug Jones from Alabama, who's only there because the GOP decided to float a pedo & Alabama decided, very narrowly, that a democrat would be a less egregious person to have on the senate than a pedo). They were under tremendous pressure to vote across party lines because of the states they are from and the likelihood that not going with the Trumpsters would end their political careers.

Side note: Sinema is pretty attractive and also bi-sexual.

[Harry]

7 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

I almost feel bad for Mitt Romney. He's not really well liked by the left for being the face of the GOP in 2012 and seeming like the ultimate American corporate shill. But he's voted with his conscience in the face of a "trial" where the jury basically had predetermined they wouldn't consider evidence and knew how they would vote - and he'd probably asked the question "why would someone who claims to be innocent present no facts to demonstrate they are innocent?" And his reward is to basically find himself an outsider in his own party, with his own niece (the head of the RNC) calling for him to leave the party for showing loyalty to the law of his country over his party.

Still think he's a representation of corporate shilling dickheadedness though.

I think more commendable is the 3 Democratic senators in deeply Red states (Sinema from AZ, Manchin from West Virginia - a state that Trump won by something ridiculous like 47 points, and Doug Jones from Alabama, who's only there because the GOP decided to float a pedo & Alabama decided, very narrowly, that a democrat would be a less egregious person to have on the senate than a pedo). They were under tremendous pressure to vote across party lines because of the states they are from and the likelihood that not going with the Trumpsters would end their political careers.

Side note: Sinema is pretty attractive and also bi-sexual.

No way that's more commendable than Romney but also very commendable. Though I still think sticking with their side is the path of least resistance towards a sustained political career with hope of future ascendancy (albeit with short term risk).

Romney has basically been unofficially kicked out of his party and pretty much ended his political career. Without John McCain he's the lone person with some level of conviction to the oaths he took. 

[Harry]

 

[Dr. Gonzo]

6 hours ago, Harry said:

No way that's more commendable than Romney but also very commendable. Though I still think sticking with their side is the path of least resistance towards a sustained political career with hope of future ascendancy (albeit with short term risk).

Romney has basically been unofficially kicked out of his party and pretty much ended his political career. Without John McCain he's the lone person with some level of conviction to the oaths he took. 

Romney’s political career was already dead once and he’s an incredibly wealthy man. I shed no tears for him.

And he’s got 6 years left in his term in any case and most voters are absolute morons so he might be fine because there’s a good chance nobody remembers

[Harry]

Trump now purging all those who testified at his impeachment hearing. Gordon Sondland (who testified under asubpoena) recalled as ambassador. Colonel vindman and his brother both terminated.

[God is Haaland]

What happened to "I'm going to build a wall and Mexico is going to pay for it."?

Loser Donald can't keep his promises, eh? AJAJAJAJAJJAJA!