• 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.

Split Thread A second impeachment

thaiboxerken said:
C'mon. Holding a POTUS accountable after he's out of office is wrong because.....

I mean, I should be able to try and steal all the money from the company I work for as long as I actually leave the company when they fire me....the firing is accountability enough, right?
Click to expand...

Depends how senior you were. If you were on the board you'd be allowed to resign, get a generous payout and keep your stock options intact. :mad:

Effectively that's what the GOP wants for President Trump - to be treated like a CEO caught with his hand in the till.
 
The Don said:
Not as I understand it.

He may feel that he wants his day in court but then again the GOP claim that only the sitting President can be impeached and so this has no standing and so President Trump has no need to appear.
Click to expand...

they can claim whatever they want but they’re not the ones who determine how the trial will be conducted this time
 
dasmiller said:
I think a sharp prosecutor could do better than that. He'll say anything to defend his ego.

Prosecutor: So, sir, would you say that a good public speaker can influence the behavior of the crowd?

DJT: Of course.

P: And are you a good public speaker?

DJT: I'm a great public speaker. Ask anyone. Some people say I'm the greatest speaker ever.

P: Do you think those people were justified in attacking the Capitol after the election was stolen from you, or were they overreacting? Should they have just waved their signs for a bit and then let it go?

DJT: Of course they were upset, it was the worst act of theft in American history! Dead people voting, machines changing votes, millions of fake ballots!

P: So should they have just waved their signs and then given up? Is that what real patriots do?

DJT: No, you don't just let the radical Democrats get away with that!

P: Now, when you were speaking to the crowd, were they paying attention to you? Were they taking you seriously?

DJT: I'm their president, and the greatest president ever! Of course they were taking me seriously. Even the antifa and BLM guys were impressed by what I said.

P: And did you understand the crowd? I know it's sometimes hard to judge a group of people, but a good speaker should be-

DJT: Of course I understood the crowd! It was my crowd!

P: So you knew there was a chance they might get violent? Or did you misjudge that?

DJT: I didn't misjudge anything!

P: So you were talking to a large crowd that you knew might get violent. Do you think you would have been able to persuade them not to get violent, or were you not a good enough speaker to have that kind of control?

DJT: I'm the best speaker ever. Of course I could control the crowd.

P: The crowd listened to you and then attacked the Capitol. Did you lose control of them? Were you not a good enough speaker?

DJT (getting angry): Of course I never lost control of them! I-

P: No further questions.
Click to expand...

 
The Don said:
In the event that President Trump does appear (and I think that's very unlikely), will he actually say anything or will he spend his time saying that he doesn't recall and/or hasn't read anything ?
Click to expand...

He might start that but if someone asks if he has the bestest memory he'll probably start telling a story.

Or he might start off thinking he can lie
 
jimbob said:
He might start that but if someone asks if he has the bestest memory he'll probably start telling a story.

Or he might start off thinking he can lie
Click to expand...

... and almost all of the Republican Senate members will believe, or act like they believe those lies no matter how outrageous they are :(
 
dudalb said:
Or the FInal Confrontration between the Clarence Darrow based charecter and the William Jennings Bryan based charecter in "Inherit The Wind" when the Byran charecter agrees to be cross examined...
Click to expand...

More likely to be pyrotechnics of the Jim Carey Liar Liar variety.
 
Last edited:
pgwenthold said:
The lawyers i have seen discuss the issue (popehat, legal eagle) have all focused only at his comments in the speech on Jan 6, and not considered his actions and words before that point. I said this to popehat and he never responded.

Has the lawyer to whom you are referring included words and actions before Jan 6 in their analysis?
Click to expand...

Yes, charges of a conspriacy (ie, deliberlty leaving the capitol unguarded) would be different then the inctiement charges which focus on his speech of the sixth...something people here don't get.
I
 
AIUI with my ear to the ground, his latest lawyers have had some rather dodgy (Mafia) clients in the past. Reason he ditched Butch and Deborah was because he wants to carry on claiming the election as stolen and a fraud. Not sure how that will vindicate him. Maybe he's hoping the 'patriots' will come bursting through the door at any moment.

Trump likely watches replays of the Capitol Riots over and over again. He watches the news from Myanmar and rues the fact, 'That could have been me'.

If only things had worked out differently...


Instead of the coup to end all coups, he's now looking at Shawshank Redemption at best, falsely accused of something he did not do and dreaming of bursting out of a tunnel into the Cayman Islands' glittering blue sea with Matt Damon and Morgan Freeman.
 
Vixen said:
AIUI with my ear to the ground, his latest lawyers have had some rather dodgy (Mafia) clients in the past. Reason he ditched Butch and Deborah was because he wants to carry on claiming the election as stolen and a fraud. Not sure how that will vindicate him. Maybe he's hoping the 'patriots' will come bursting through the door at any moment.

Trump likely watches replays of the Capitol Riots over and over again. He watches the news from Myanmar and rues the fact, 'That could have been me'.

If only things had worked out differently...


Instead of the coup to end all coups, he's now looking at Shawshank Redemption at best, falsely accused of something he did not do and dreaming of bursting out of a tunnel into the Cayman Islands' glittering blue sea with Matt Damon and Morgan Freeman.
Click to expand...
In other words, he's certifiably insane.

Could insanity be a defence? That has been mentioned seriously more than once...
 
Vixen said:
Squeegee Beckenheim said:
The Viking wants to speak at the impeachment trial, after Trump didn't pardon him
Click to expand...

Right. Let's just turn the whole thing into a circus.

Chansley, Watkins said, had been "horrendously smitten" with Trump but now feels "like he was betrayed by the president" after Trump failed to give him and other Capitol rioters pardons.
Click to expand...


Severe dose of narcissicism if he really thought Trump would give him and his 'low-class' ilk a pardon.
Click to expand...


And?

We want Trump's poison to be seen for what it is. Qbacca would be an ideal person to demonstrate that - he's also bitter, because like anyone else, Trump's betrayed him.
 
The Don said:
AIUI, former Presidents are entitled to continue to use the title.

If not, I will happily call him former President or just Donald Trump.
Click to expand...

Yes, they are entitled to use it. However, if anyone has lost the moral right to use it, it's Trump.
 
jimbob said:
And?

We want Trump's poison to be seen for what it is. Qbacca would be an ideal person to demonstrate that - he's also bitter, because like anyone else, Trump's betrayed him.
Click to expand...

Nah. 'He made me do it', is the oldest defence in the book. It will detract from the proceedings if Chansley turns up. It's all a publicity stunt for him. He loves that he has become world famous notorious overnight. He's so crazy I wouldn't be surprised if he claims to be an undercover antifa or some such lunacy.
 
So, is this the smoking gun that indicates an invasion of Capitol Hill was planned in advance at the highest levels? It is being claimed by some that the now resigned former Defence Secretary, Christopher Miller, issued a memo to Capitol Police and the DC Nation Guard to take a low key attitude on the certification day, 4 Jan 2021, in the widespread public knowledge that Trump wanted Pence to block the election confirmation and was also holding a 'Save America Rally' nearby for 30,000 people.

In testimony before the House this week, Capitol Police and D.C. National Guard officials acknowledged that by Jan. 4 they understood that “… the January 6th event would not be like any of the previous protests held in 2020. We knew that militia groups and white supremacist organizations would be attending. We also knew that some of these participants were intending to bring firearms and other weapons to the event. We knew that there was a strong potential for violence and that Congress was the target.”

On that same day, former acting Defense Secretary Christopher Miller issued a memo to the secretary of the Army placing some extremely unusual limits on National Guard forces for that event. It’s not a to-do list. It’s a list of thou shalt nots. A long list. A list that says guard forces can’t arrest any of the pro-Trump protesters, or search them, or even touch them. And that’s just for starters.

The full memo shows that the D.C. Guard did receive a request from D.C. government for guard presence during the Jan. 6 event. Miller responds promptly to go ahead, so long as the soldiers are given no weapons, no body armor, and no helmets.
Click to expand...
The Intellectualist

You can read the document here:

https://twitter.com/donwinslow/status/1355977325368623107?s=20
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom