• 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

JoeMorgue said:
"There's nothing in the rulebook that says a Golden Retriever can't play football" is not the level we should be happy with our government being run on.
Click to expand...

Be that as it may, that's the level that government has been running on for a long time. This isn't new, this isn't peculiar to Trump.
 
PICK ONE!

Right now, Trump is either guilty politically, but exonorated legally, or guilty legally, but exonorated politically.
Set yourself one standard instead of switching as convenient!
Hint: he is guilty either way.
 
Trump is a criminal and his acquittal by the GOP is going to embolden him to continue breaking the law and ramp up his election rigging efforts. It appears that the USA is now just a smaller version of Russia now.
 
Squeegee Beckenheim said:
I don't know what the GAO said about him,
Click to expand...

There are actually multiple cases where the GAO said the Obama administration broke the law. Some of them Obama himself probably had little role in, but one of them, the terrorist prisoner release in exchange for Bowe Bergdahl, he definitely did play a role in, and the GAO concluded that it was a violation of the law.

but I'm happy to say that if he broke the law he should have received the appropriate punishment for breaking that law.
Click to expand...

But that's just it: in both Obama's case and Trump's case, neither violation is a crime, and neither violation is actually punishable. I'm not picking Obama as the example because I'm claiming Obama is particularly bad. I bet you can find similar examples with every president for the last 50+ years. If you find something wrong with this, well, I don't blame you. But again, Trump isn't the first, this is the way government has operated for a long time now, and if you want anything to actually change, then Congress has to act to change the law and impose actual penalties. But as of now, it's not a crime and there is no punishment. And Trump isn't the reason that it's not a crime and there is no punishment.
 
TragicMonkey said:
From what I've read modern consensus in veterinary medicine is that the one-to-seven ratio is not an accurate estimation of canine aging. "Dog years" is pretty much a dead concept now.
Click to expand...

1) It's not linear. The first year of a dog may be more like 12 years of a human, and the second is more like 9, etc. The 7 years things is based more on things like dividing the average life span of a human to the average life span of a dog. So if the average life span of a human is 84, and that of a dog is 12, then, voila....

2) Even using life span, it's species dependent. Big dog breeds have very different average life spans than do toy breeds.
 
pgwenthold said:
1) It's not linear. The first year of a dog may be more like 12 years of a human, and the second is more like 9, etc. The 7 years things is based more on things like dividing the average life span of a human to the average life span of a dog. So if the average life span of a human is 84, and that of a dog is 12, then, voila....

2) Even using life span, it's species dependent. Big dog breeds have very different average life spans than do toy breeds.
Click to expand...

Which is why the whole idea has always been ridiculous. 5 years in dog years is still 5 years.
 
Okay, which part is in dispute here?
  1. Trump used the power of his office to engage in a quid pro quo with a foreign country for own personal political gain.
  2. The Trump administration actively covered up his actions by, among other things, moving records of his quid pro quo discussions to encrypted classified storage, despite the conversation not having any national security information in it.
I mean, there are more facts in the case, but I figure these are the main two. If these are not sufficient reason to remove a president from office, what is?
 
pgwenthold said:
1) It's not linear. The first year of a dog may be more like 12 years of a human, and the second is more like 9, etc. The 7 years things is based more on things like dividing the average life span of a human to the average life span of a dog. So if the average life span of a human is 84, and that of a dog is 12, then, voila....

2) Even using life span, it's species dependent. Big dog breeds have very different average life spans than do toy breeds.
Click to expand...

Which breed of dog could be assured of living eight years? Because I would vote for such a dog for president. It would be miles above what we got now.
 
Ziggurat said:
Be that as it may, that's the level that government has been running on for a long time. This isn't new, this isn't peculiar to Trump.
Click to expand...

Again pick a lane.

"It's not new to Trump" but Trump is using it to do things that no President has ever done before and why am I even wasting my breath you're just gonna go "Nuh uh, nothing Trump is doing is new..."
 
Belz... said:
Which is why the whole idea has always been ridiculous. 5 years in dog years is still 5 years.
Click to expand...

Well, not to be overly pedantic, but if you accelerated a dog to the speed of light wouldn't it age slower? I propose testing this empirically.
 
Belz... said:
Don't worry. Discussions here have become so needlessly pedantic that no one will notice this one.
Click to expand...

Technically speaking it's only pedantics if it's off topic, on topic it's nitpicking. Unless it breaks through the Earth's crust in a specific region of France, then it's an arachnid.
 
Belz... said:
Don't worry. Discussions here have become so needlessly pedantic that no one will notice this one.
Click to expand...

I bring it back to topic by declaring we should impeach any president who is not a dog. Then any president who is a dog should be accelerated to near-light speed to extend its lifespan.

Come to think of it, if we accelerated a human president to near-light speed it would reduce their opportunities to commit misdeeds, whether technically criminal or not, both by time dilation and the simple mechanics of whizzing around in a very fast orbit. Yes, this makes excellent sense and is not prohibited by the constitution. Let us prepare the launch!
 
JoeMorgue said:
Again pick a lane.

"It's not new to Trump" but Trump is using it to do things that no President has ever done before
Click to expand...

Unsupported assertion.

and why am I even wasting my breath you're just gonna go "Nuh uh, nothing Trump is doing is new..."
Click to expand...

When you keep making the same mistake, I'm going to keep pointing it out.
 
TragicMonkey said:
From what I've read modern consensus in veterinary medicine is that the one-to-seven ratio is not an accurate estimation of canine aging. "Dog years" is pretty much a dead concept now.
Click to expand...

I actually read an article the other day which said that the way that it's now believed that dog ageing works is that they rapidly age to middle age, then stay middle aged for a long time, and then get old at the end.

So either way Air Bud would be allowed to play, and you're a big meanie for suggesting otherwise.
 
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