• 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

Paul2 said:
Don't forget Ezekiel 25:17
The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men. Blessed is he who, in the name of charity and good will, shepherds the weak through the valley of the darkness. For he is truly his brother’s keeper and the finder of lost children. And I will strike down upon thee with great vengeance and furious anger those who attempt to poison and destroy my brothers. And you will know I am the Lord when I lay my vengeance upon you.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

:thumbsup:

Or

"Check out the big brain on Brad."
 
Meadmaker said:
So there's a precedent, but is there a point? Is seeking a conviction worth the effort?


For my part, I wish the Senate would convene this afternoon, rush through some rule changes to allow a vote on conviction without needing the usual trappings of a trial, and actually vote him out, even with only a week left in office. However, that isn't going to happen, so is there a point in convicting him after his term ends? Seems like posturing to me. That's not horrible. Posturing isn't always a bad thing. It's just not something, at least in this case, that I can get all that excited about.
Click to expand...

First, a Senate 'trial' should reveal a lot. But that is going to happen anyway.

Second, Pelosi wants to then vote that Trump cannot run for or hold a federal office.

That has interesting implications. It probably means Trump can't run in the GOP Primary. Maybe Mitch has that in mind.

It doesn't mean Trump can't run his 'donate to my campaign' scam.

The second one also means Trump will split the vote if it gets that far which I don't believe it will.

Right now Trump is leading "our cause" according to him. That could be a nightmare, or it will fizzle like Trump's other endeavors.
 
"When you're the President and you order an armed violent mob to march on the Capitol, you essentially admit to doing so, there is footage of you doing it, 5 people are dead because of it, all because of you've spend years building up a conspiracy theory about a shadowy deep stealing the election from you then THERE SHOULD BE CONSEQUENCES" is either something you accept as true or you're not worth talking to.
 
Segnosaur said:
It also doesn't help when word gets out about Trump refusing to pay Rudy Guiliani for his "legal" work.
Click to expand...

I'm sure I commented at the time that whilst I admired the grift in Giuliani's billing of Trump at $20k/day, it was a bit wasted on someone with such a reputation for not paying his lawyers.
 
JoeMorgue said:
I do wonder how much stuff is going to wind up being named after Trump.

I mean even Nixon got his Presidential Library and a couple of schools named after him; although nowhere near the amount other Presidents did.

I don't see a USS Donald J Trump aircraft carrier or Trump International Airport in the cards.
Click to expand...

Maybe a Garbage Scow running out of New York?
 
I've been trying to predict how T**** can spin this, and I suggest the following:

"Not many people know this, but impeachment is a core American value, and I've done more than any other president ever to maintain that most precious of American rights. I'm the most perfectly impeached president ever, everyone says so."
 
I wonder if The PDJT will have to actually testify this time? I know he didn't the first time around. If he has to swear to tell the truth, he's done for.
 
jimbob said:
I'm sure I commented at the time that whilst I admired the grift in Giuliani's billing of Trump at $20k/day, it was a bit wasted on someone with such a reputation for not paying his lawyers.
Click to expand...

When you aren't going to pay your lawyer anyway, why not offer some outrageous amount to lure them in to work for you?
 
alfaniner said:
I wonder if The PDJT will have to actually testify this time? I know he didn't the first time around. If he has to swear to tell the truth, he's done for.
Click to expand...

He could. He could claim Executive Privilege. He could invoke the Fifth. The Executive Privilege claim seems to be on questionable grounds. But he could claim it. This would slow the process down. Not sure by how much. But see below as an example of how long it could maybe take below.

Nixon was subpoenaed by Judge Sirica and Nixon refused claiming Executive Privilege "The President wants me to argue that he is as powerful a monarch as Louis XIV, only four years at a time, and is not subject to the processes of any court in the land except the court of impeachment". Sirica and Nixon appealed to SCOTUS on May 31st. SCOTUS heard oral arguments on July 8th. SCOTUS ruled 8 to 0 against Nixon on July 24, 1974. Just under 2 months which is fast for the court.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom