• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Cont: House Impeachment Inquiry - part 3

I am disgusted by the Trial, and I am also disgusted that the Dems seem on the verge of guaranteeing four more years for Donnie by following in the footsteps of the Labor Party in the UK by nominating somebody who seems destined to lose to Trump in the general because he scares people..rightly or wrongly....more then Trump does.
 
Last edited:
dudalb said:
I am disgusted by the Trial, and I am also disgusted that the Dems seem on the verge of guaranteeing four more years for Donnie by following in the footsteps of the Labor Party in the UK by nominating somebody who seems destined to lose to Trump in the general because he scares people..rightly or wrongly....more then Trump does.
Click to expand...

Who would that be?
 
dudalb said:
I am disgusted by the Trial, and I am also disgusted that the Dems seem on the verge of guaranteeing four more years for Donnie by following in the footsteps of the Labor Party in the UK by nominating somebody who seems destined to lose to Trump in the general because he scares people..rightly or wrongly....more then Trump does.
Click to expand...

:rolleyes:
 
Good evening.
Just a question. If several of the Senators phones or computers are hacked and the info is strategically leaked, is that ok?
 
Ladewig said:
Yes.
And that should not be a problem because it Will be 5 weeks between the election and the ECvote in December.. but what if President Trump were to say, “the investigation was rigged, therefore the EC vote is invalid. I will lead an investigation myself.” Large swaths of Americans have unfailingly believed his evidence-less assertions in the past and will continue to do so in the future. Will Congress contradict him?
Click to expand...
I think you are neglecting to consider what would need to happen if evidence of interference could be found (or even convincingly fabricated).

The election would be invalid, no?
From there the source of the interference would need to be eliminated, and a system in which it could not repeat would need to be devised. Then a new election held- perhaps with the same candidates, perhaps not.

It could stretch on for years- or at least long enough for the divisions such a situation would likely cause to put an end to our system of governance as we know it.

Considering how damaging to our Nation such meddling could be, one wonders why it seems to be taken so lightly by our commander in chief.
 
This what-if-he-won't-step-down discussion seems inordinately dystopian - until I factor in the load of codswollop that Dershowitz floated in the Senate ... which senators will swallow right up if they think it helps their re-election chances.

Now I feel like anything's possible.
 
theprestige said:
Maybe the moral of the story is that it's a mistake to hang impeachment on charges that require "corrupt intent". Because intent is very hard to prove.

Ironically, the whole question of removal comes down to a question of what's best for the country. Even stipulating that the alleged acts were committed, the Senate still has to decide whether the national interest is best served by removing this president, for these acts, at this time.

If your Senator says, "I concede that the President did some of the things he's been accused of doing, but I think the national interest is best served by leaving him in office and letting the voters decide," you'd never be able to prove they voted for any reason other than that one. The best you could do is decide, as a voter, not to re-elect them.
Click to expand...

Do you really think there is a moral of the story?
 
Distracted1 said:
Considering how damaging to our Nation such meddling could be, one wonders why it seems to be taken so lightly by our commander in chief.
Click to expand...
"One wonders"? I don't. He takes it lightly because he thinks it will help him and what's good for Trump is good for the country, right? He's really doing it for us!
 
Minoosh said:
This what-if-he-won't-step-down discussion seems inordinately dystopian - until I factor in the load of codswollop that Dershowitz floated in the Senate ... which senators will swallow right up if they think it helps their re-election chances.

Now I feel like anything's possible.
Click to expand...

Dersh was on The View yesterday. The ladies were having none of his nonsense. His opinion on what is impeachable is certainly not shared by the vast majority of Constitutional scholars.
 
Still going on, the House is not addressing Burisma and Biden getting rid of the prosecutor. Meanwhile, the Trumpers are going on and on with innuendo about the Biden corruption.

Gaaaaaahhhh!
 
The gaslighting is insane!

Now they are claiming an acquittal will do wonders for separation of powers.
 
Right blog-o-sphere exploding in apoplectic rage at Justice Roberts for being a neoliberal plant from the RINO GWB administration.

Left blog-o-sphere exploding in apoplectic rage at Senator Paul and arguing he should be arrested.

Both sides sharing in some of the worst armchair legal analysis possible.
 
If you ask me I think he's asking himself why the hell he's even there... tbh his role is mostly ceremonial and he has to walk a fine line trying not to seem partisan... I don't envy his position.
 
theprestige said:
I don't think it's called gaslighting when it's one politician talking to another. I think then it's just called "pissing in my ear and telling me it's raining." And no politician really falls for it.
Click to expand...
Nonsense! These are lawyers testifying in Congress, not at a campaign rally.

Maybe you don't want to look at the facts but they are outright lying, making **** up. Like today, they are pretending Dershy never made the argument he made yesterday.

In addition to the gaslighting they are full of straw man arguments. Maybe those are the ones you are looking at.
 
Delphic Oracle said:
Right blog-o-sphere exploding in apoplectic rage at Justice Roberts for being a neoliberal plant from the RINO GWB administration.

Left blog-o-sphere exploding in apoplectic rage at Senator Paul and arguing he should be arrested.

Both sides sharing in some of the worst armchair legal analysis possible.
Click to expand...

But isn't Paul breaking the law by outing the whistleblower who has federal protection?
 
Stacyhs said:
I had to stop watching the trial. I just couldn't take it any more. I'm just so utterly disgusted by it.
Click to expand...

I beat you to that by several weeks, because I gave up during the original House hearings.
I agree with whoever said this will guarantee Trump reelection. Well, this and the blatant cheating.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom