Foxx

@transplantbillsfan's boy right here. he is not going to be the candidate, there is a reason why he is broke and potential donors know it. https://twitter.com/TrumpWarRoom/status/1190035492500316161

cool. so it's not a he said he said thing but a he heard a he said, he said, he said thing

i much prefer DR's post above...

your initial post made the claim and of which the main gist was, that treason was only applicable when force was used. my retorts were that force comes in many forms. note that the adverb, 'physical' is not used in descriptive terms for force in the portion of the Constitution you quoted. it seems that with the post above, you are trying to argue both sides of the coin now. that aside, can there be any doubt that in today's ***** up world that there is not a persuasive argument to be made that what the Democrats are alleged to have done could be tantamount to treason? i would say one could be made.

you really are a *****, you know that tibs? your taking true evil and trying to politicize it.

the one thing all of your scenarios have in common is that those on the receiving end would consider those acts as acts of war. conversely, typically, the sending parties, not so much in deference to their biases. i contend that if i sent code that blew up a nuclear reactor, it would be an act of war regardless of the rationale used by anyone. historical definitions change with time. what applied over two hundred years ago can and will become dated and immaterial, it is just the force of nature.

let's say for example that i send malicious code to blow up nuclear reactor, Taishan in China. no force was involved other than sending bytes of information via cyber space. act of war or not?

my point is that the wars of today are not just fought on the battlefield. more often than not they will begin in cyberspace and effectively be fought there as well.

from the CIA itself: The New Face of War: How War Will Be Fought in the 21st Century ... future wars will not be won by having more atoms (troops, weapons, territory) than an opponent, but by having more bits . . . of information. ...

here in the 21st century, the definition of what constitutes war is drastically different than what it was in the 18th century with technology playing a major role in that.

FIFY

ain't happening. the Senate however, is a different animal.

https://twitter.com/som3thingwicked/status/1189876431460929537

https://twitter.com/RealSaavedra/status/1189951422701260801

i agree, it is almost certain that the House will refer Articles of Impeachment to the Senate. it is also almost certain that the Senate will acquit.

it's getting pretty contentious out there. keep your head on a swivel.

FIFY

so... you disagree with the fight for fair trade?

here is the problem as i see it. what the Dems are doing in the basement of the Capital is an issue because the Dems are the ones conducting the investigation. Schiffty's gang wants to be perceived as an independent council doing an investigation into possible high crimes and/or misdemeanors. previously, Clinton's impeachment inquiry was done by an outside special council led by Ken Starr. this, at the very least, gave the appearance of impartiality. that inquiry also gave no special accommodations to President Clinton during the discovery phase. no real prosecution investigation gives consideration to defense concerns at this point. what this investigation is trying to accomplish, is much the same. an investigation into what the facts of the accusations are. however, there is a real problem with what is going on. Schiffty is leading this, 'special council', which, based upon his previous statements towards Trump alone, should omit him from any role in an investigatory relation to any type impeachment inquiry, not to mention simply being, in this day and climate, on the other side of the aisle. i believe the reason they have chosen to keep the investigation "in House", is so that they can control the outcome. they didn't get what they wanted from Mueller so they are not going to chance it happening again. add to it all that there never was a floor vote on whether or not the majority of the House wanted to begin an impeachment inquiry, lending questionable validity to the entire process we are seeing, just adds to the dubiousness that the American populace sees. that Nancy has called a vote to establish procedure going forward does nothing to change any of the above. she only hopes that they can claim they held a vote of the House so they are adhering to precedent. history is not going to be kind to the One Hundred and Sixteenth United States House of Representatives.

the resolution has passed 231 - 196. with 2 dems voting, 'nay'. it is so ordered.

https://twitter.com/RexChapman/status/1189614024750718976

Debunking some of the Ukraine scandal myths about Biden and election interference