• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Cont: House Impeachment Inquiry - part 3

Minoosh said:
How would that look any different than what we see now?
Click to expand...

Because right now Trump only has the motivation to go as far as it takes to "trigger the libtards." I don't want him to have motivation to go any further.
 
JoeMorgue said:
I think it's worse then that. Trump... might actually be starting to believe his own hype.

I fear Trump might start to shed the troll persona and actually turn into someone who thinks he can do no wrong (as oppose to someone who is just a hollow shell with a personality but no psyche projecting the image of someone who can do no wrong) under the same "Well nobody stopped me yet so I must be doing something right" mentality his defenders slyly use.
Click to expand...

This is going to come back on Republicans eventually; I don't mind so much the idea that this will bite the GOP on the ass so much- it's the possibility that it will bite us all on the ass that bothers me. And I don't mean just with Trump; this sets a precedent for any future president, of any party, to define his own interests as the interests of the nation, and to make decisions that will be, by that definition, consequence free for him, even if not for the rest of us. There needs to be a separation between politics and policy; thanks to the GOP and Trump, they've been made an identity.
 
Sen. Susan Collins on saying she'll vote to acquit Trump:

Quote:
I believe that the president has learned from this case.
Click to expand...
Asked about Sen. Susan Collins saying he’d learned a lesson, Trump told the anchors he did not agree. He had done nothing wrong. “It was a perfect call.”
Click to expand...
Well, there ya go- lesson learned, I guess.
Click to expand...
If I were a Maine democrat, I would immediately put out a series of ads directed at Collins... "Naive or corrupt". Make it look like a gameshow.

Narrator/host: "Now Susan Collins voted to acquit, claimed that Trump learned his lesson. Trump Said he did nothing wrong. Was Collins being complicit/corrupt or just naive?

Contestant 1: Corrupt
Contestant 2: Naive
Contestant 3: It doesn't matter

Narrator/host: Correct! It doesn't matter! Whether Collins is complicit in Trump's crimes or is just foolish, she is still acting as Trump's lap dog!

Then they can repeat the ad with Collins claim that she only voted for the republican Tax cuts for the Wealthy because Moscow Mitch promised to bring in funding bills for Obamacare "really soon" (hint: It didn't happen.)

And then they can also repeat the ad with Collin's confirmation vote for Kavanaugh when she claimed he would not overturn Roe v Wade, but immediately voted to uphold a law that limited access to abortion.

She really does have a habit of believing (or at least pretending to believe) rather obvious lies, doesn't she.
 
turingtest said:
This is going to come back on Republicans eventually; I don't mind so much the idea that this will bite the GOP on the ass so much- it's the possibility that it will bite us all on the ass that bothers me. And I don't mean just with Trump; this sets a precedent for any future president, of any party, to define his own interests as the interests of the nation, and to make decisions that will be, by that definition, consequence free for him, even if not for the rest of us. There needs to be a separation between politics and policy; thanks to the GOP and Trump, they've been made an identity.
Click to expand...
The source of the consequence is the Presidents approval going through the floor. If Trump's approval was the same as Nixon's was at the end, he would be gone now. What is Trump's approval at the moment amongst Republicans, ~95% and around 40% with Independents? If Clintons approval had dropped to 20%, he'd have been gone. No President gets kicked out by the Senate on Trumps numbers. Republican or Democrat. You have to have some semblance of bipartisan support and the public behind it or the cost is to the party that does it is too high.
 
Bob001 said:
Commentators say that makes this the first bi-partisan presidential impeachment vote in history.
Click to expand...

If they are using "The first time a member of a President's own party voted to convict them of impeachment" I believe they are correct.

In both previous acquittals; Johnson in 1868 and Clinton in 1999 there was bipartisan support for the acquittal.

Nixon's hypothetical impending impeachment probably would have almost certainly been bi-partisan.
 
I wonder if some people here are ready to take back some of the crap they said about Romney back in 2012.
I never supported Romney, because I disagreed with his policies,I was an Obama man all the way, but always thought he was a decent,honorable man, and a number of members here basically smeared him, going back 30 years to an incident where he accidently killed a pet dog of his as proof he was unfit the presidency. Though I was an Obama supporter, I thought that was ridiculous .

And stuff like this:http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=235813&highlight=romney

Sorry, but that is incredibly petty.
 
Last edited:
Venom said:
Mitt Romney plans to vote to convict Trump on one charge.

One of the last few decent Republicans left.
Click to expand...
Good for him. I'm not sure if decency is what's motivating him - it could be. Maybe he doesn't want to insult the intelligence of his constituents by voting to acquit a man who is manifestly as guilty as sin.
 
dudalb said:
I wonder if some people here are ready to take back some of the crap they said about Romney back in 2012.
I never supported Romney, because I disagreed with his policies,I was an Obama man all the way, but always thought he was a decent,honorable man, and a number of members here basically smeared him, going back 30 years to an incident where he accidently killed a pet dog of his as proof he was unfit the presidency. Though I was an Obama supporter, I thought that was ridiculous .
Click to expand...


Bill Maher said after the 2016 election that "we" (liberals, progressives) should be sorry for trashing John McCain and Mitt Romney because they were decent, honorable men that we just disagreed with. That helped pave the way for D. Trump.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/v...e_were_wrong_fascist_trump_is_different.html#!
 
dudalb said:
I wonder if some people here are ready to take back some of the crap they said about Romney back in 2012.
I never supported Romney, because I disagreed with his policies,I was an Obama man all the way, but always thought he was a decent,honorable man, and a number of members here basically smeared him, going back 30 years to an incident where he accidently killed a pet dog of his as proof he was unfit the presidency.
Click to expand...
I don't remember that the dog died, only that he strapped its kennel to the car's roof for something like 300 miles.

I appreciate that he had a decent plan on health care.

Trump will go berzerker.
 
Ziggurat said:
Rand Paul didn't out the whistleblower. They were outed a long time ago. This pretense of continuing to protect their anonymity is a farce. Schiff pretends he doesn't know who the whistleblower is, but everyone who is even the slightest bit interested knows, and there isn't a chance in hell that doesn't include Schiff. The fact that Roberts refused to read the question doesn't protect his identity, it simply demonstrates that Roberts already knows his identity.
Click to expand...

Oh FFS. What Rand-ee-o is trying to do is lend a kind of 'legitimacy' to the name by official 'recognition.' Officials are not supposed to do that, but rather should engage in the fiction of not knowing. Because, like, that's what they're *required* to do regarding whistleblowers. Not make for a perfectly unambiguous target for any whacko to set his sights on.
 
Bob001 said:
Bill Maher said after the 2016 election that "we" (liberals, progressives) should be sorry for trashing John McCain and Mitt Romney because they were decent, honorable men that we just disagreed with.
Click to expand...
Obama said something similar:

"(Romney&McCain) were wrong on certain policy issues but I never thought that they couldn't do the job"
 
JoeMorgue said:
Because right now Trump only has the motivation to go as far as it takes to "trigger the libtards." I don't want him to have motivation to go any further.
Click to expand...
Despite his combative Twitter persona, I'm not sure he has much taste for actual combat. I look at Trump and think, he won because he massively trolled the "libtards." When I look at Putin I see a guy who got where he is by killing all his enemies, possibly with his bare hands.
 
Minoosh said:
Despite his combative Twitter persona, I'm not sure he has much taste for actual combat. I look at Trump and think, he won because he massively trolled the "libtards." When I look at Putin I see a guy who got where he is by killing all his enemies, possibly with his bare hands.
Click to expand...

...while riding a bear.
 
That was an amazing revelation. I never thought much about Romney before, but his commitment to his convictions, the law, and the truth are so rare as to be commendable.
 
dudalb said:
I wonder if some people here are ready to take back some of the crap they said about Romney back in 2012.
I never supported Romney, because I disagreed with his policies,I was an Obama man all the way, but always thought he was a decent,honorable man, and a number of members here basically smeared him, going back 30 years to an incident where he accidently killed a pet dog of his as proof he was unfit the presidency. Though I was an Obama supporter, I thought that was ridiculous .

And stuff like this:http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=235813&highlight=romney

Sorry, but that is incredibly petty.
Click to expand...

He is a decent honorable man. Mostly, that is. I think his religion is a major crock and I disagree with most of his policy positions, but I have never thought he was a bad guy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom