Cont: House Impeachment Inquiry - part 2

[theprestige]

I really don't understand your post.

The Senate conducts the trial according to rules predetermined before the trial. So agreements between Schumer and McConnell can be codified as those rules will be voted on by the entire Senate. Right now as the way the rules are written the Chief Justice may on his own issue subpoenas for documents and testimony. However his decisions may be voted on by the entire Senate and therefore overruled by the Senate. But Roberts orders after being handed the gavel may not be appealed to another court. If Bolton gets a subpoena to appear during the impeachment trial, there isn't another option but to appear. Although he might be able to take the 5th. But the Senate could grant him immunity and then he would then really have no choice.

I don't understand your post at all. Please cite the constitutional passages and senate rules that support your claims.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Is that how trials normally work in your world? The prosecutor drops the case without going to trial, so now the accused is guilty forever?

You forget who we are talking about. Nothing normal applies to Trump. And despite his claims in public that the impeachment is a farce, you know underneath he's irritated, maybe even absolutely livid.

 

[theprestige]

You're a moron if you think he doesn't. The Constitution doesn't say that the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court becomes President of the Senate. It says the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court presides over the trial.

It says that the chief Justice presides over the senate, when the senate is conducting a trial of the president or the vice president. For obvious reasons.

Do you understand that the role of President of the Senate is not the same as the role Vice President, nor the same as the role of Chief Justice?

 

[Meadmaker]

I disagree with your conclusions. Trump CANNOT win on this.

I hope you are right. I am confident you are wrong.

 

[theprestige]

You forget who we are talking about. Nothing normal applies to Trump. And despite his claims in public that the impeachment is a farce, you know underneath he's irritated, maybe even absolutely livid.

I know? Arrogant much? Whose died and made you Chief Physician of what I do and do not know?

Fort all I know, Trump has already rationalized this whole thing away, the way he's apparently rationalized and escaped every other setback in his life.

 

[Belz...]

That's part of the "resistance" problem - bending reality so much that everyone is getting it.

Amazing how Trump supporters project, like their dear leader. If there's anyone trying to bend reality, it's Trump and his deplorables.

Trump's sense of humour might be sick, politically incorrect or whatever you feel is wrong with it, but his sense of humour is one of his defining characteristics.

In the sense that he doesn't have one.

 

[Belz...]

It would be one thing if the inquiry had bipartisan support and then suddenly we had partisanship become an issue...

Except that as you're certainly well aware, bipartisan actions are increasingly difficult, and it's not because of the Democrats.

the great scheme of Ukrainegate make-believe

No susprise that you latched on to Russian propaganda on this one.

One of the funs about Garrison is that he's objectively extremely talented as a cartoonist

How can pretend that anything can be objectively good or bad with a straight face?

You've quoted both of them already. Please spare us further distractions.

Wow. So in response to a sincere apology and a promise to answer your question, you replied, JUST AFTER HIS ANSWER, that it's just a distraction?

Do you have any sense of honesty and respect for anyone?

 

[Belz...]

Given the alternative - Killary - I do think it's good. And it is amusing.

And that, right here, is why I think most of the Trump supporters support Trump. Sure, there are some racists and real deplorables among them... but if you look at the rallies, I think something becomes evidence in how they react to Trump's nonsensical ramblings.

And that thing is: the fact that he's a wrecking ball is the whole point. He says things that he shouldn't say, does things he shouldn't do, disrespects those who deserve respect, etc. It's the 'liberating' feeling of not having to be respectful, politically correct, mindful, professional and civil. It's a rebellion against everything people are expected to be; the death throws of a dying subset of the American population.

And his followers do the same thing: they say outrageous things just to get a rise out of people because don't think they nomally should do it. They don't believe in what they post or say. It's just a game.

 

[acbytesla]

It says that the chief Justice presides over the senate, when the senate is conducting a trial of the president or the vice president. For obvious reasons.

Do you understand that the role of President of the Senate is not the same as the role Vice President, nor the same as the role of Chief Justice?

Article I, Section 3, Clauses 6 and 7

When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside.:

And unlike the VP, the Chief Justice is not there to break ties.

But what you're suggesting has never happened.

Just so you know. The full Supreme Court has already ruled on this. It said in Nixon v US that the Supreme Court has nothing to do with impeachment.

 

[acbytesla]

I hope you are right. I am confident you are wrong.

I'm not saying that Trump cannot win the election. Just that this is a loser for him in the court of public opinion.

 

[Paul2]

How can pretend that anything can be objectively good or bad with a straight face?



Wow. So in response to a sincere apology and a promise to answer your question, you replied, JUST AFTER HIS ANSWER, that it's just a distraction?

Do you have any sense of honesty and respect for anyone?

Thanks, I couldn't really get what CE had said to make sense, and I think you just laid out what it meant.

 

[Meadmaker]

I'm not saying that Trump cannot win the election. Just that this is a loser for him in the court of public opinion.

I don't know how to measure in order to find the right answer, but this is where I hope you are right, but I'm confident you are wrong. I was hesitant at first, but as I listen to more commentaries on impeachment, I grow more convinced that this issue is a loser for the Democrats.

The Republicans were the ones who wanted the individual role call vote for impeachment. They certainly think this issue is a winner for them.

 

[acbytesla]

I don't know how to measure in order to find the right answer, but this is where I hope you are right, but I'm confident you are wrong. I was hesitant at first, but as I listen to more commentaries on impeachment, I grow more convinced that this issue is a loser for the Democrats.

The Republicans were the ones who wanted the individual role call vote for impeachment. They certainly think this issue is a winner for them.

There are districts where it might be. And districts where it might not be. Every one is just guessing. But I'm convinced with the way the headlines change so fast with Trump that few people if any in 11 months will be voting based on that.

 

[smartcooky]

I'm not saying that Trump cannot win the election. Just that this is a loser for him in the court of public opinion.

This is the thing that some are overlooking.

Even if only 49% on Americans want him removed (not a majority) that's every second American

It is devastating for a National leader to know that one in every two of his people want him thrown out of office.

If this impeachment was really the sham, nothing to see here that Republicans are trying to make it out to be, the numbers favouring removal would be a lot lower. The one in two figure is a personal indictment of Trump.

 

[Lurch]

Possibly. But that's an awfully long time to hold on to the articles. Maybe she's just hoping that Trump will lose and moot the whole thing.

But if he wins, how's that going to play? If Republicans hold the Senate and Trump wins re-election, then those Republicans are going to see his victory as a mandate to keep him in office. If Democrats gain the Senate and convict Trump right after he's re-elected, that's going to look like they're just trying to undo the results of the election. That, I think, would blow up in their face. President Pence wouldn't likely be any better for their agenda.

I don't see how this works for Pelosi unless Trump loses. Certainly the nominal reason of trying to force Republicans to run the trial in a way Democrats are happier with doesn't make any sense.

Instead of reflexively assuming impeachment is all about partisan politics, with some short term goal that serves narrow interests being the driving force, isn't it even the tiniest bit *possible* that you might consider the basic motivation being to be seen as doing the *right* thing for history?

One could be given to think that the reasoning mode of the Right is to always project upon the Left that which they themselves would do.

 

[alfaniner]

You know, I just hope he goes on believing all his poll reports. Then when the reality of well... reality hits him in the face with the actual voting results, he's gonna be gobsmacked.

 

[Lurch]

There is no trial going on if the Senate doesn't even have the articles.



How did Barr snuff out the Mueller report? That doesn't make any sense. Mueller presented his report. Very little of it was redacted, and Mueller didn't complain about any of what was redacted.

Barr **** out his 'summary' weeks before the Mueller Report was released. This festering lie was left to grow roots in the minds of the Trumpists. If a lie precedes, the truth recedes. A smart tactic, but despicable.

 

[varwoche]

I really don't understand your post.

The Senate conducts the trial according to rules predetermined before the trial. So agreements between Schumer and McConnell can be codified as those rules will be voted on by the entire Senate. Right now as the way the rules are written the Chief Justice may on his own issue subpoenas for documents and testimony. However his decisions may be voted on by the entire Senate and therefore overruled by the Senate. But Roberts orders after being handed the gavel may not be appealed to another court. If Bolton gets a subpoena to appear during the impeachment trial, there isn't another option but to appear. Although he might be able to take the 5th. But the Senate could grant him immunity and then he would then really have no choice.

Of course he or any witness can take the 5th. Or a witness could claim executive privilege.

 

[Trebuchet]

You know, I just hope he goes on believing all his poll reports. Then when the reality of well... reality hits him in the face with the actual voting results, he's gonna be gobsmacked.

You just used the word "reality" in relation to Trump. That's always a mistake.
It'll just be millions of illegals being bused from state to state, fraud upon fraud, rigged elections, etc. Just like last time.

 

[acbytesla]

This is the thing that some are overlooking.

Even if only 49% on Americans want him removed (not a majority) that's every second American

It is devastating for a National leader to know that one in every two of his people want him thrown out of office.

If this impeachment was really the sham, nothing to see here that Republicans are trying to make it out to be, the numbers favouring removal would be a lot lower. The one in two figure is a personal indictment of Trump.

Yep.

I really think the impeachment itself is a big loser for the Republicans. Because the facts are not on their side. Trump DID extort a foreign power to get them to smear his political opponent. Supporting impeachment based on that is easily justified and defensible.

There is going to be billions of dollars spent on political advertising over the next year. More than what has been spent in the last 3 years combined. So the idea that public opinion can't or won't change over the next year seems unlikely.

The bad news is the Democrats aren't anywhere close to having a nominee. Which makes it hard to settle on messaging.

The good news is the Democrats aren't anywhere close to having a nominee which makes it harder for Republicans to run that person down.