Backintheday544

That’s an overly simplistic view of yesterday. My main take always from yesterday evidence on why I would disagree: 1. The Dems did a good job of presenting legal articles from conservative scholars who believe you can impeach after leaving office. These were the same scholars, like Adler, that were used by Republicans in the first impeachment to prove their points. 2. The vote that it was constitutional was done on a bi-partisan basis. The vote the it was unconstitutional was entirely partisan. Having 1 Republican sit there, listen to the arguments and change his mind is pretty telling. 3. I thought the Dems did a good job of explaining that impeachment post office was done in the past. 4. Not being able to impeach a losing president for actions committed at the end of a term could provide too much expanded reach for the Executive branch. As to the conviction vote, I think it’s a different animal. I have money on no conviction but it is a political process. If the evidence presented would affect chances of re-election you could see Republicans jump. If McConnell signals he would vote to convict, you’d see other Republican senators follow. The evidence does matter because unlike the first impeachment, America is watching this one. It has a catchy story. The people who voted one way or another will need to defend that vote as primary season is starting soon and then the next election cycle as well. Keep in mind in 2022, there are 14 Dem and 20 Rep senate seats up for grabs.

We can make a further analogy. Imagine if a figure head of BLM stood near McConnels house. Gave a speech saying McConnel still owns slaves and hunts persons of color for fun. We’re going to March over there and fight it.

And you don’t believe the person inciting this behavior should be held accountable? If BLM had a leader and that leader was like go riot the streets or spread false information like Mitch McConnel still owns slaves take that information and do with it what you will, you wouldn’t think that person deserves some repercussions?

Not just Pence, they had the next 3 levels of succession after Trump in that building at the time of the insurrection.

I guess money can’t buy happiness. I can’t find any stat that shows which counties complain more than the other.

Roberts isn’t presiding because Trump isn’t President: “When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside” The President isn’t being tried therefore the Chief Justice doesn’t have to preside.

If only those on the right could start pulling themselves up by the bootstraps: if they would just get jobs and contribute to the economy they wouldn’t have time to riot and start insurrections

That’s why I think today will be really interesting. One of the right wing bots here said Americans don’t care about impeachment. I can see that for the first one. In terms of what drives ratings a phone call with Ukraine isn’t really a winner. But now we have the January 6th insurrection. Everyone was glued to their TVs, it was all over social media, who here in the US doesn’t know about the QAnon Shaman? Id guess this impeachment trial will be watched much more by every day citizens. The Dems just need to paint this for the horrific act it was and Americans will watch. It could put some people in hard positions 2 years from now having to defend that vote. Thats why it’s interesting we got a Republican flip on a procedural vote. No one will face an attack add over a procedural vote and the vote yesterday will be forgotten soon enough. The same won’t be said for the conviction vote.

67 to convict. The point being though that the poll that matters are first the impeachment and second the conviction. I’d content, as sent a conviction to get 5 or more Rs to vote to convict would be big for the Dems. That also puts Trump as the only impeached president to vote bipartisan conviction votes not once but twice. It also gets rid of the this is a partisan witch hunt stigma.

They polled the House a couple weeks ago if there were high crimes and the results came back bipartisan that over 50 percent thought there were. In the next week or so, they will poll the Senate and it again will come back with a result of over 50 percent believe there are and it will be bipartisan.

Possibly. Defending a vote based on the legalese that was thrown around on constitutionality is a lot easier to defend than one based on evidence. Still doubtful of a conviction but interesting to say the least. Especially since a Republican moved over on this vote.

Bipartisan vote that the impeachment is constitutional!

Because the whataboutism is strong with them.

Republicans used this argument during the first impeachment that other things need to get done. Democrats have done a pretty good job of filling the cabinet and setting up reconciliation during this entire impeachment process. It’s not like they can’t do more than one thing at once.

Your quote: “. As for Trump, he never stated that Russia did not attempt to interfere in our election” that is a lie. while outside the scope of your original lie, The Mueller report also stated that Russia favored Trump.

Trump never stated Russia didn’t try to interfere in the election? https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-russia-summit-idUSKBN1K601D Asked if he believed U.S. intelligence agencies, which concluded that Russia interfered in the 2016 election in an effort to help him defeat Democrat Hillary Clinton, Trump said he was not convinced it was Moscow. "I don't see any reason why it would be," Trump said. "President Putin was extremely strong and powerful in his denial today."

awww. I feel the same way about your comments. The drivel you spit is incredibly low class and uninformed! Politico had a great article on why Trump failed in the trade deficit. Things that hurt the deficit were things like Trump policy, like tarrifs, trade wars, how he handled farmers, not passing an infrastructure bill, etc: https://www.politico.com/news/2020/10/06/trump-trade-deficit-426805 Forbes too points at issues with Trumps China war: https://www.forbes.com/sites/chuckjones/2020/09/30/trump-isnt-delivering-on-reducing-the-trade-deficit/ Your analogy would make sense if we were maybe talking about GDP.

hmmmmm.... it’s almost as if you look at numbers at two different time periods the numbers may change. Your article is like turning the Bills on with a 9 point lead over the chiefs. The OPs article is like the final score.

“But then again, just use the government and their media friends to force and put pressure on businesses, corporations, churches, and everyday citizens to bend the knee.” - welcome to capitalism

Kind of like Twitter. If you don’t like their policy don’t use it. The right seems to really confuse private business and government action.

On recent political music I prefer: Ye vs the People I’m Not Racist

Everyone.... don’t attempt a coup of the country if you have a planned vacation in Mexico you can’t miss: https://www.businessinsider.com/capitol-rioter-asks-court-permission-leave-us-for-mexico-vacation-2021-2 A woman who was charged with participating in the insurrection at the US Capitol on January 6 asked a federal court to let her leave the US for a vacation she had booked in Mexico. Jenny Cudd's lawyers asked the US District Court for the District of Columbia on Monday to approve Cudd's request to travel outside the country. The motion, seen by Insider, said Cudd had "planned and prepaid for a weekend retreat with her employees for the dates of February 18 through February 21, 2021, in Riviera Maya, Mexico." "This is a work-related bonding retreat for employees and their spouses," it added.

Jewish Deep state obviously used a secret time machine to plant evidence to make her look like an idiot.

The first stimulus was always going to go through reconciliation. It’s a process that is allowed under the constitution and was used 2 out of 2 times the Republicans could use it under Trump. Once for the TCJA and once to repeal ACA. It’s only allowed once per fiscal year. After Trump gave the Dems the house the Republicans weren’t able to use it again. A funny story on reconciliation in the TCJA. A reconciliation bill is not allowed to have any provision that doesn’t relate to the budget. One of the first lines in TCJA was this bill shall be called the TCJA. Bernie Sanders took this provision to the parliamentarian and it was struck from the final bill. So the TCJA isn’t actually called the TCJA in the bill language. This is known as the Byrd rule. So the actual name of the TCJA is An Act to provide for reconciliation pursuant to titles II and V of the concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2018.

She wouldn’t be a national hero if she was on the left either. The left would call out her as a cancer just like McConnell did yesterday.