Bob in Mich Posted October 16, 2019 Posted October 16, 2019 16 minutes ago, KRC said: Now that the Democrats have set this precedent, it will be interesting to see how they react when the Republicans do the exact same thing to a Democrat president. It's not yet the trial though. It is an investigation and a vote on impeachment inquiry is not required. The investigation is taking place in a body led by Democrats and at this point they are not likely to do anything to help Republicans that is not absolutely mandated. After all, if there is any politician unconcerned with ignoring past norms it is Trump so he should expect equal treatment. When the trial begins, if it does, the Republicans will have all of their rights and then some as it will be held in a Republican Senate. We will certainly witness the Republicans partisanship there. Don't worry.
Tiberius Posted October 16, 2019 Author Posted October 16, 2019 14 minutes ago, DC Tom said: I've said for a while that, when the Democrats think they can get away with it, they'll try to legally ban the Republican Party. Looks like they're getting closer and closer... Since you guys are setting the precedent to invite foreign governments into our elections all that will be so much easier for us. 27 minutes ago, KRC said: Now that the Democrats have set this precedent, it will be interesting to see how they react when the Republicans do the exact same thing to a Democrat president. So instead of having fake House investigation after investigation about stand down orders, the GOP will hold secret impeachment hearings?? Lol! Good! Thats really funny, actually. It will save us from all that gsslighting they do in front of the cameras
KRC Posted October 16, 2019 Posted October 16, 2019 5 minutes ago, Bob in Mich said: It's not yet the trial though. It is an investigation and a vote on impeachment inquiry is not required. The investigation is taking place in a body led by Democrats and at this point they are not likely to do anything to help Republicans that is not absolutely mandated. After all, if there is any politician unconcerned with ignoring past norms it is Trump so he should expect equal treatment. When the trial begins, if it does, the Republicans will have all of their rights and then some as it will be held in a Republican Senate. We will certainly witness the Republicans partisanship there. Don't worry. It cannot get to trial without a vote in the House, unless they impeach by Pelosi alone. At some point, to get it to the Senate, they need to take a vote. In that case, will it be straight party lines if the Democrats obviously bypass due process? I am guessing there will be some scared Dems who would vote no because of the obvious sham. 2
DC Tom Posted October 16, 2019 Posted October 16, 2019 11 minutes ago, Bob in Mich said: It's not yet the trial though. It is an investigation and a vote on impeachment inquiry is not required. The investigation is taking place in a body led by Democrats and at this point they are not likely to do anything to help Republicans that is not absolutely mandated. After all, if there is any politician unconcerned with ignoring past norms it is Trump so he should expect equal treatment. When the trial begins, if it does, the Republicans will have all of their rights and then some as it will be held in a Republican Senate. We will certainly witness the Republicans partisanship there. Don't worry. It's an investigation, so the Democratic House can exclude Republicans, because the Republicans control the Senate and will be heard there after impeachment? Because Trump started it? Someone tell me again that pot is harmless... 1
Deranged Rhino Posted October 16, 2019 Posted October 16, 2019 12 minutes ago, Bob in Mich said: It's not yet the trial though. It's not, you're right. It's not an inquiry either though. It's theater because they know they cannot win at the ballot box. If they had any confidence at all, they wouldn't be taking this road. But they know they're screwed. So does anyone else who's watching objectively rather than from inside a partisan bubble.
Tiberius Posted October 16, 2019 Author Posted October 16, 2019 Just now, DC Tom said: It's an investigation, so the Democratic House can exclude Republicans, because the Republicans control the Senate and will be heard there after impeachment? Because Trump started it? Someone tell me again that pot is harmless... Republicans can do their own cute little investigation. I'm sure it will be honest
3rdnlng Posted October 16, 2019 Posted October 16, 2019 Just now, DC Tom said: It's an investigation, so the Democratic House can exclude Republicans, because the Republicans control the Senate and will be heard there after impeachment? Because Trump started it? Someone tell me again that pot is harmless... I was just giving a tiny bit of consideration to responding to that idiot when your comments above were posted. Thanks for keeping me relatively clean.
Tiberius Posted October 16, 2019 Author Posted October 16, 2019 Just now, Deranged Rhino said: It's not, you're right. It's not an inquiry either though. It's theater because they know they cannot win at the ballot box. If they had any confidence at all, they wouldn't be taking this road. But they know they're screwed. So does anyone else who's watching objectively rather than from inside a partisan bubble. They won the House they are doing the investigation in at the ballot box. Sh it, they win it out of a bunch of GOP gerrymandered states. The emerging Democratic majority is only just getting started
Bob in Mich Posted October 16, 2019 Posted October 16, 2019 1 minute ago, KRC said: It cannot get to trial without a vote in the House, unless they impeach by Pelosi alone. At some point, to get it to the Senate, they need to take a vote. In that case, will it be straight party lines if the Democrats obviously bypass due process? I am guessing there will be some scared Dems who would vote no because of the obvious sham. Surely there will be a House vote in order to advance it to the Senate, if it ever advances. That is mandated and will certainly be done by the Dems. Every issue these days is nearly unanimously along party lines and this will be no exception. Some Dems may dissent. Is the actual reason because they don't like the process, or they fear for their own re-election in a Trump district, or for some other reason? Probably a case by case examination would be needed to tell. I guess I was sort of replying in part to Rep Smucker on twitter that complained that the House investigation was a secret political trial. The trial will be in the Senate
Deranged Rhino Posted October 16, 2019 Posted October 16, 2019 5 minutes ago, Bob in Mich said: Surely there will be a House vote in order to advance it to the Senate, if it ever advances. Why take a vote and endanger the vulnerable incumbents in Trump districts? Why take a vote and allow the other side an equal seat at the table? They won't vote, because they know they can't win in the Senate and voting will only expose their charade. Instead they are in the driver's seat, able to selectively leak testimony to frame a narrative which the lemmings will eat up and the media will run with without questioning the validity of the information. This is all theater. It's gaslighting. The Russia lie didn't work out, so now they're on to a new one. It was always a coup. Still is. 1 1
Tiberius Posted October 16, 2019 Author Posted October 16, 2019 7 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: Why take a vote and endanger the vulnerable incumbents in Trump districts? Why take a vote and allow the other side an equal seat at the table? They won't vote, because they know they can't win in the Senate and voting will only expose their charade. Instead they are in the driver's seat, able to selectively leak testimony to frame a narrative which the lemmings will eat up and the media will run with without questioning the validity of the information. This is all theater. It's gaslighting. The Russia lie didn't work out, so now they're on to a new one. It was always a coup. Still is. A coup? Anyone saying that is either hyperventaling or completely ignorant of the Constitution 1
Bob in Mich Posted October 16, 2019 Posted October 16, 2019 13 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: It's not, you're right. It's not an inquiry either though. It's theater because they know they cannot win at the ballot box. If they had any confidence at all, they wouldn't be taking this road. But they know they're screwed. So does anyone else who's watching objectively rather than from inside a partisan bubble. I keep hearing this argument and it is not a good one. How about a football analogy? Let's say there is growing evidence that the Patriots have been paying off the NFL refs and the replay guy in NY. Nothing has been proven yet but a league investigation is underway and evidence is being gathered. The Patriots of course are denying and obstructing the investigation at every turn. They are ignoring subpoenas to testify and all requests for evidence - stonewalling every investigative path. As you know the Bills have to play these guys again this year. Your argument is like the Patriots saying stop this unfair investigation now, quit your bitching, and play the upcoming game. If you want to beat us, do it on the field. You can see the problem there, right?
DC Tom Posted October 16, 2019 Posted October 16, 2019 Just now, Bob in Mich said: I keep hearing this argument and it is not a good one. How about a football analogy? Let's say there is growing evidence that the Patriots have been paying off the NFL refs and the replay guy in NY. Nothing has been proven yet but a league investigation is underway and evidence is being gathered. The Patriots of course are denying and obstructing the investigation at every turn. They are ignoring subpoenas to testify and all requests for evidence - stonewalling every investigative path. As you know the Bills have to play these guys again this year. Your argument is like the Patriots saying stop this unfair investigation now, quit your bitching, and play the upcoming game. If you want to beat us, do it on the field. You can see the problem there, right? I'm sorry...you lost me at "league subpoenas." Get the ***** outta here, you moron.
Tiberius Posted October 16, 2019 Author Posted October 16, 2019 (edited) 1 minute ago, DC Tom said: I'm sorry...you lost me at "league subpoenas." Get the ***** outta here, you moron. Right, back to the smart coup talk and how Republicans are about to be in violation of the law by existing Edited October 16, 2019 by Tiberius
Deranged Rhino Posted October 16, 2019 Posted October 16, 2019 24 minutes ago, Bob in Mich said: I keep hearing this argument and it is not a good one. How about a football analogy? Let's say there is growing evidence that the Patriots have been paying off the NFL refs and the replay guy in NY. Nothing has been proven yet but a league investigation is underway and evidence is being gathered. The Patriots of course are denying and obstructing the investigation at every turn. They are ignoring subpoenas to testify and all requests for evidence - stonewalling every investigative path. As you know the Bills have to play these guys again this year. Your argument is like the Patriots saying stop this unfair investigation now, quit your bitching, and play the upcoming game. If you want to beat us, do it on the field. You can see the problem there, right? Why use an analogy at all? The House can impeach for anything they wish. It's entirely political -- and how they're running this "inquiry", which runs counter to precedent and history and sets a BAD example of doing things in secret, is entirely political. They have no desire to call a vote, because a vote hurts their position. It does not help it. It puts their members in danger of losing re-election to go on record in certain districts, and holding a vote (if they won it) would only force the process from the shadows (where they want it, so they can control it and build a narrative rather than reveal the truth) into the daylight. They don't want that. The dems don't want to do this in the open. After you just learned the very same people have been lying to you for three years about having "more than circumstantial evidence that Trump committed TREASON" with Russia, aren't you at least a little suspicious that they now are running this whole thing in secret? Why give them the benefit of the doubt after you now know, for a fact, they lied to your face for three years about Trump/Russia. They lied not because they cared about protecting the country or were worried about national security -- they lied because they disagreed with who the people legally elected POTUS and wanted to reverse the election. That's not the move made by people who care about preserving the constitution or republic. It's a move made by political partisans who only care about POWER. Not truth. 3
Bob in Mich Posted October 16, 2019 Posted October 16, 2019 26 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: Why use an analogy at all? The House can impeach for anything they wish. It's entirely political -- and how they're running this "inquiry", which runs counter to precedent and history and sets a BAD example of doing things in secret, is entirely political. They have no desire to call a vote, because a vote hurts their position. It does not help it. It puts their members in danger of losing re-election to go on record in certain districts, and holding a vote (if they won it) would only force the process from the shadows (where they want it, so they can control it and build a narrative rather than reveal the truth) into the daylight. They don't want that. The dems don't want to do this in the open. After you just learned the very same people have been lying to you for three years about having "more than circumstantial evidence that Trump committed TREASON" with Russia, aren't you at least a little suspicious that they now are running this whole thing in secret? Why give them the benefit of the doubt after you now know, for a fact, they lied to your face for three years about Trump/Russia. They lied not because they cared about protecting the country or were worried about national security -- they lied because they disagreed with who the people legally elected POTUS and wanted to reverse the election. That's not the move made by people who care about preserving the constitution or republic. It's a move made by political partisans who only care about POWER. Not truth. I used the analogy to make the point. If the game has been fixed with the refs, playing again is not going to decide fairly. If one party is cheating during the election, the results would be tainted. One final time, I disagree with your take on Trump/Russia as you know all too well. I am not getting on that hamster wheel with you again. There was a lot of improper activity by the Trump campaign, just not enough in Mueller's opinion to convict Trump of conspiracy. There was clearly obstruction of justice. Without Barr's protection it could have easily gone a different way last spring. And just to restate, thinking that hundreds in the IC and press are involved in a vast conspiracy that if discovered could result in their death, is still as silly as ever. I disagree too on your take about a House vote. I guess we will see but I think they will vote to impeach Trump and will send it to the Republican controlled Senate where he will be acquitted. As you mention about the House members, I would like the Senators to go on the record. If in the future, Trump is proven to be guilty of several crimes/misdeeds, I like the idea of having a record of who wished to put Trump above the law. I read somewhere that this is like 'The Boy Who Cried Wolf'. You claim that anyone that thought Trump was guilty of conspiring with the Russians is a liar, not simply mistaken, but a liar. They cannot now be believed, right? The problem though is that every investigator of Trump is in that group. You are thus advocating for no oversight for Trump. Even you must see that would place him above the law. Let me ask you, what current Trump investigator would you believe? Name names please. The primary point of that Boy-Wolf story was that liars never win. At least that was what I took away as a child. Folks seem to ignore though that although the Boy lied, in the end the sheep got eaten because the others now ignored his cries of help. The Wolf was really there that next time but the others never even looked.
Deranged Rhino Posted October 16, 2019 Posted October 16, 2019 1 minute ago, Bob in Mich said: One final time, I disagree with your take on Trump/Russia as you know all too well. It's not me you're disagreeing with. You're disagreeing with Mueller and the actual, objective, evidence (and lack thereof). Trump Russia was fiction from the beginning. That's not me saying it, Mueller's report said it. 2 minutes ago, Bob in Mich said: I read somewhere that this is like 'The Boy Who Cried Wolf'. You claim that anyone that thought Trump was guilty of conspiring with the Russians is a liar, not simply mistaken, but a liar. They cannot now be believed, right? The problem though is that every investigator of Trump is in that group. You are thus advocating for no oversight for Trump. Even you must see that would place him above the law. Let me ask you, what current Trump investigator would you believe? Name names please. The bolded is not true. There are no "investigators of Trump". There are DOJ and USIC employees. Not all of them were involved in Trump/Russia, only a handful (who have all been fired/removed/resigned). Again, when you don't understand the basic facts of what happened, perhaps it's time to refresh and reconsider what you think you know? 1
IDBillzFan Posted October 16, 2019 Posted October 16, 2019 3 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said: Just when I think the left can't become any more of schittshow...they step up and prove me wrong. 2
Gavin in Va Beach Posted October 16, 2019 Posted October 16, 2019 (edited) 10 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: Wow the ###### balls on this guy. Dollars to donuts CNN/Cooper let Biden know this question was coming. That response sounded rehearsed. Edited October 16, 2019 by Gavin in Va Beach 3
Recommended Posts