Cont: House Impeachment Inquiry - part 2

Status
Not open for further replies.
Squeegee Beckenheim said:
See? This is the narrative that withholding the Articles promotes. This is the message Pelosi is helping to spread and strengthen.
Click to expand...

On the other hand, if they had not waited, the Trumpsters would have found something else to bitch about.

You can't expect anything else from those who don't argue in good faith. It's all about the narrative.
 
Squeegee Beckenheim said:
There's also the question of whether or not it's actually legal and/or democratic. Can any Speaker of the House hold back anything they don't like which passes through Congress? If so, then what's the point of Congress?
Click to expand...


Good question.

Ask that about the 300 passed bills the House has sitting on McConnell's desk in the Senate, being held back.

Pelosi is questioning the wisdom of rushing madly to send yet one more over to them, and somehow this is heinous.
 
acbytesla said:
Actually words don't have meanings. Only usages that evolve over time. But you're right. Blackmail is not the right word. Extortion is more precise.
Click to expand...


That's some Gold Star Pedantry right there. Amazing, the contortions some people will engage in simply to avoid admitting they were mistaken.

We aren't using the words "over time". We're using them at this time.

Those words, being used at this time have the meanings (or usages, if you prefer) which are commonly accepted at this time.
 
Meadmaker said:
Does anyone actually think more testimony is needed? We know exactly what happened.
Click to expand...

Do you really think that the testimony of McGahn, Bolton, Mulvaney et al might not add anything to our understanding of the events in question? And even possibly reveal additional misdeeds? Getting it out live on TV might very well be the first exposure of the whole sordid mess for a large percentage of the population that never read the Mueller report and who’s impression of it is simply the “No Collusion. No Obstruction.” mantra initiated by Barr and repeated ad nauseum by Trump.

While it’s doubtful that there’s anything they could say that would sway the Republican Senators, it’s still “needed” in the sense of confirming and clarifying what the President did, when he did it and his state of mind as he did so. For the sake of history, if nothing else.
 
Last edited:
In the good ol' days Superman could get away with saying he stood up for "Truth, Justice and The American Way." Could a modern treatment have him say that without generating smirks and snark in the audience?
 
Mojo said:
Trump doesn’t seem to have one.
Click to expand...


That's part of the "resistance" problem - bending reality so much that everyone is getting it. 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. The greatest troll in human history. He just doesn't give a flying ****.
 
theprestige said:
You couldn't figure it out, even with all the labels?

Also, when did wearing a business suit become dressing like Trump? Did he invent the coat and tie in 2016, right before he invented lying in politics?
Click to expand...


I was originally going to say " ... in the Trump costume?", but a Trump costume would include a fat suit.

I guess it would be "Who's the skinny guy wearing the Trump mask?"
 
Last edited:
acbytesla said:
You mean they want an actual fair trial with witnesses? The charlatans! How dare they!

How many trials are you familiar with Bear where jurors declare they have no intention of being fair?

How many trials do you know where half the jurors are coordinating the defense with the defendant?

How many Federal investigations are you familiar with where the President prevented witnesses to testify and documents to be forwarded to the investigators?
Click to expand...

The house of representatives had sole discretion to deal with their impeachment inquiry as they saw fit and they called every witness they deemed appropriate while blocking ones selected by the Republicans. It would be one thing if the inquiry had bipartisan support and then suddenly we had partisanship become an issue... but everybody knew the impeachment and trial were going to be decided on party lines from DAY ONE of this inquiry.

In that context... why are we having this discussion now? The Democrats had far more than enough votes... and thus had full control over the House's side of the process. They passed the articles knowing full well that they were doing so relying on a party-line vote. They knew well ahead of time that once this thing got into the Senate, they wouldn't have the same authority... so what stopped them from taking additional time to use their opportunity to present more evidence than they did?

The president obstructed congress? People need be reminded that separation of powers still exist even if you think the POTUS is a scumbag. He exerted his right under the Executive branch. The House of Representatives had the right and the opportunity to respond to THAT through the Judiciary Branch. They... CHOSE.... not... to.

The senate won't offer a fair trial? The Democrats held a fair inquiry? You seem to forget, certain people calling for his removal and proclaiming guilt of a crime BEFORE Ukraine was ever an issue. Certain people saying how they will impeach this 'mother-----r' the same night they got elected into congress. You seem to forget that the Mueller report was supposed to trigger an impeachment by proving Trump conspired with Russia to cheat Hillary Clinton out of an election victory. And your only concern and surprise is that Republicans are already stating their decision on the verdict? News flash, this vicious partisanship isn't new. I distinctly remember calls for Obama to be a one-term POTUS... this has been going on for years and years already.

You're telling me about holding a fair trial in the senate as if this is in any way a standard court case. Bear in mind, that the senate trial has all of these people as the jurors. You have ZERO random jury pool selection. Every single one of these congress members that proclaimed guilt of crimes PUBLICLY with zero "innocent until proven guilty" burden to deciding the verdict before a trial... all of these people are your court's jurors. You cannot replace the jurors in this trial over their biases because this is not a standard court of law. It's political no matter how you attempt to spin it and it's viciously partisan. I accept that you believe the evidence supports Trumps' removal. That doesn't exonerate you or anyone else from viewing the reality of an impeachment trial. It is by nature, political. It should never be like this... but it's the reality and you can't spin that, so stop trying to.


acbytesla said:
The House of Representatives and the nation have EVERY RIGHT to see a trial with evidence laid out before them. And that is the last thing the Republicans want to happen.
Click to expand...
Again... you and everyone else knew from day one, that this impeachment and trial were going to be hyper partisan. The house democrats knew they were going to rely on a partisan vote only to have it shot down by a partisan senate. The Democrats did it anyway. And now they're complaining about the fairness of the trial. Spin it how you will but the end product of their delay with the articles of impeachment going to the senate don't speak well when you consider they knew what they were dealing will from the start. This puts a thorn in the messaging they could have used against republicans had they gone through the electoral remedy instead. Now they have to deal with it, and we'll see how it plays out
 
Last edited:
Armitage72 said:
I was originally going to say " ... in the Trump costume?", but a Trump costume would include a fat suit.
Click to expand...

You might be the only person in the country who saw a picture of the Democrats shooting an impeachment cannon at a guy in a Trump suit, and didn't instantly understand the guy was supposed to be Trump

Were you also confused about the thing at the back of the bathtub, with the Capitol dome on top of it? That's an outboard motor. It symbolizes the Democrats using the apparatus of government to propel their attack on the guy in the Trump suit.

The thing behind the head of the guy in the Trump suit is the sun. It's positioned to look like a halo, further emphasizing the holiness of the guy in the Trump suit.

I don't recognize the guys in the bathtub with Pelosi, but from the labels and the context I figure they're probably House Democrats involved in the impeachment inquiry. One of them is probably supposed to be Schiff or something.

And I'm pretty sure the guy in the Trump suit is supposed to be Donald Trump.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom