Cont: House Impeachment Inquiry - part 3

[Cain]

"If a president does something which he believes will help him get elected in the public interest, that cannot be the kind of quid pro quo that results in impeachment." -- Alan Dershowitz

Trump should assassinate Adam Schiff for all of this impeachment hoopla.

 

[plague311]

I'm just not getting what Bolton is going to prove happened that Trump hasn't already openly bragged about doing.

Trump admitted both the Quid-pro-quo and the obstruction. Neither of these facts are in dispute.

Getting Bolton up there so prove he did it doesn't matter when the defense is "Yeah he did it but we don't care, it's all a deep state witch hunt, but whatabout Biden..."

It tunnels the GOP into fewer talking points. If you can force them into a situation where their only choice is "we have say who cares, he did it, what does it matter?" Then that's what they have to do. There aren't multiple paths out of that situation. You can then use that to rail on.

I mean, I know, I get it. There are a series of members here that have done absolutely nothing but chicken little every move the Dems make. In fact, there hasn't been a single step the Dems have made that hasn't been the complete end of the party, election, lets just hand everything over the the GOP. Yet every time I look their moves have gained support, and any of the Dem candidates seem to be beating Trump in most polled states.

 

[JoeMorgue]

It tunnels the GOP into fewer talking points. If you can force them into a situation where their only choice is "we have say who cares, he did it, what does it matter?"

Yeah that or they could just lie and pretend they never said the first thing like they always do.

Trolls don't have the long, complicated plans you can throw a monkey wrench into. You don't have to be consistent, or honest, or non-hypocritical when your goal is trolling.

We're putting more thought into Trump's strategy then Trump is. He never thinks beyond "Whatever is going to work up the lib-tards this particular moment."

 

[theprestige]

I just think someone of Biden's experience who probably understands what he did in Ukraine better than anyone in the room can handle Trump's conspiracy theory team.

I have always laughed at people who declare this person or that person a genius or an idiot when the facts were or weren't on their sides. It doesn't work that way. I've sold countless products in my life. Some were hard as hell to sell and others sold themselves. As much as I'd like to take credit for being successful, I know the best way to sell is pick the right company/products to sell.

So unless Trump's team has some unknown to this moment monster bombshell, I like Biden's chances of mopping up.

This is the same Joe Biden who can't keep it together long enough to not touch girls in public, even after being told multiple times.

 

[Donal]

"If a president does something which he believes will help him get elected in the public interest, that cannot be the kind of quid pro quo that results in impeachment." -- Alan Dershowitz

Trump should assassinate Adam Schiff for all of this impeachment hoopla.

Seriously, that means nothing the president does can be considered illegal or impeachable.

We really need these scumbags gone. Like yesterday. Not just the weakling president. The whole lot of them. And any Democrat who is even thinking about waffling. They all need to be voted out if he isn't removed.

 

[plague311]

Yeah that or they could just lie and pretend they never said the first thing like they always do.

As you said, they always do, so it's something you were going to stop anyway. Repeatedly pointing it out to the American public is what makes the tides turn. Doing nothing about it at all because it's just going to happen does absolutely nothing at all.

Trolls don't have the long, complicated plans you can throw a monkey wrench into. You don't have to be consistent, or honest, or non-hypocritical when your goal is trolling.

Ok. I mean, I guess **** it then, amiright?

The nominees running aren't trying to appeal to the trolls. You don't run campaign ads to target trolls. You don't fight injustice so that you can display your efforts to trolls. You ******* ignore trolls. So who gives a **** what they do or say? Why even bring them up? They're muff cabbage.

We're putting more thought into Trump's strategy then Trump is. He never thinks beyond "Whatever is going to work up the lib-tards this particular moment."

Which, in my opinion, is starting to work against him. A lot of people were concerned about Trump normalizing his behavior, and that's happening. The reaction to Trump's constant stream of ******* bull **** is lessening every time. Just as easily as it's claimed trolls\Trump are extremely effective, there is just as solid evidence that they really, really aren't.

 

[JoeMorgue]

I'm actually wondering if we might see a split decision. Neither enough to come close to convict, but still a noticeable difference between the two.

I can't put my finger on why, and to be clear this is one step removed from pure speculation so take it for what it's worth, but I just have a gut feeling that for the people on the fence the "obstruction of justice" charge is going to be easier to swallow then the "abuse of power" and the way for some of the people to "Bet 50 on black and 50 on red" so to speak.

I can see, again just on a gut level, the final vote for the "Obstruction of Justice" charge having a few more "Yay" votes then the "Abuse of Power" charges.

I wouldn't be totally shocked if the "obstruction" charge just barely gets to that 51 symbolic simple majority and the "abuse" charges stay well below it.

Or I could be completely wrong. Rolling dice in the dark here.

 

[Donal]

They can't remove him. That is the whole game. The GOP Senators are out there giving campaign speeches for him outside the chamber.

 

[bobdroege7]

Well you'd think that, but have you seen some of the GOP ads lately? They're doubling down on their Trump support.

Yeah, I'm pining for the good old days: Nixon and his tapes, Agnew and whatever, Reagan and Bush and Iran Contra and just plain dumb Bush.

 

[BobTheCoward]

Seriously, that means nothing the president does can be considered illegal or impeachable.

We really need these scumbags gone. Like yesterday. Not just the weakling president. The whole lot of them. And any Democrat who is even thinking about waffling. They all need to be voted out if he isn't removed.

Only for things that require corrupt intent. Things where intent is irrelevant would still apply.

 

[Tero]

I say, that was a joke, son.

I remember that Obama. He was the one that talked to the enemy, instead of sending bombs.

 

[Crazy Chainsaw]

Seriously, that means nothing the president does can be considered illegal or impeachable.

We really need these scumbags gone. Like yesterday. Not just the weakling president. The whole lot of them. And any Democrat who is even thinking about waffling. They all need to be voted out if he isn't removed.

Are You crazy I have been saying that for ten Years and no one listen they called me a Crazy Insane Conspiracy theorist .
Join the club.

 

[dudalb]

I'm actually wondering if we might see a split decision. Neither enough to come close to convict, but still a noticeable difference between the two.

I can't put my finger on why, and to be clear this is one step removed from pure speculation so take it for what it's worth, but I just have a gut feeling that for the people on the fence the "obstruction of justice" charge is going to be easier to swallow then the "abuse of power" and the way for some of the people to "Bet 50 on black and 50 on red" so to speak.

I can see, again just on a gut level, the final vote for the "Obstruction of Justice" charge having a few more "Yay" votes then the "Abuse of Power" charges.

I wouldn't be totally shocked if the "obstruction" charge just barely gets to that 51 symbolic simple majority and the "abuse" charges stay well below it.

Or I could be completely wrong. Rolling dice in the dark here.

Don't be nieve. An acquittal is a done deal. You still think the GOPers in the Senate have anything remotely resembeling a conscience?

 

[dudalb]

If for no other reason, the Bolton controversy is really creating problems for the GOP in the senate. The guy has been a favorite among conservatives for years, and now he and Trump are in open warfare. No matter what they do, they will make someone angry. I love their pain over this.

 

[llwyd]

Seriously, that means nothing the president does can be considered illegal or impeachable.

Well, yeah, the unitary executive. Based on artificially isolating pretty much just a couple of phrases in the constitution regardless of all the overwhelming context of painstaking quest of preventing a corrupt tyranny à la George III. But there we go.

 

[Delphic Oracle]

Seen this gem float across social media a few times, no idea who deserves attribution.

HEARING ROOM - INT - DAY

ALL THE WITNESSES: Ok we all agree. This is what happened.

REPUBLICANS: None of you were in the room!

BOLTON: *raises hand* Well I was in the...

REPUBLICANS: Who asked you?! Shut up! You’re a liberal pawn!

BOLTON: Um... I’m actually I’m a lifelong Republican and I was literally Trump’s national security advi...

REPUBLICANS: Shut your mustache! Somebody bring back the first national security advisor.

FLYNN: *in orange jumpsuit* Hey sorry guys I’m in jail lol.

REPUBLICANS: What? Why?

FLYNN: For lying to the FBI about the Russia investigation.

REPUBLICANS: Well what idiot told you to do that?!

FLYNN: The Pres...

REPUBLICANS: Shut up! No one believes either of you!

KELLY: *raises hand* I believe them. And I was Trump’s Chief of sta...

REPUBLICANS: Shut up! Let’s talk to the real chief of staff. Who is he?

MULVANEY: *raises hand* It’s me.

REPUBLICANS: ****. Never mind.

PARNAS: *raises hand* I was also in the room. In fact, here’s a cell phone video of the President saying that...

REPUBLICANS: Wait what?! How in hell did you sneak a cell phone into a meeting with the President?

PARNAS: It was easy I just walked right in and...

REPUBLICANS: Shut up! You’re a criminal!

PARNAS: Correct. And I just walked right into...

TRUMP: I don’t know him.

PARNAS: And here’s 500 pictures of me with the President because we’re besties.

REPUBLICANS: Wait... What idiot introduced you to the President??

PARNAS: His personal lawyer.

REPUBLICANS: Cohen??

COHEN: *also in orange jumpsuit* Hey no sorry guys I’m in jail too.

REPUBLICANS: Why?

COHEN: For campaign finance violations.

REPUBLICANS: Who’s campaign?

COHEN: The Pres...

REPUBLICANS: Shut up!

PARNAS: It was Giuliani.

YOVANOVITCH: Giuliani! That’s the guy who had me fired from my job!

REPUBLICANS: Who are you??

YOVANOVITCH: I was the ambassador to Ukraine.

REPUBLICANS: Wait, you had her fired? Do you work for the government??

GIULIANI: Nope.

REPUBLICANS: Well who is the ambassador to the European Union??

SONDLAND: *raises hand* Me. I was also in the roo...

REPUBLICANS: F@$&!!!

PUTIN: *rubs his bare chest*

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

 

[Segnosaur]

So the latest Trump defense:

According to Dershowitz, there is nothing wrong with 'Quid pro quo' because the president thought it was in the country's best interest to get himself re-elected.

From: https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/29/politics/dershowitz-quid-pro-quo/index.html
...a politician trying to win reelection is acting in the national interest, and therefore a quid pro quo aimed at boosting reelection chances cannot be impeachable.

Trump's defense must be some sort of elaborate dare... "Lets put out the dumbest possible argument and see how the GOP reacts".

 

[a_unique_person]

Bolton is going to retire. Whatever that means. I think not golf. Maybe there is a cave where neocons meet every week to decide where the neocon lobbyist money will go.

And pat each other on the back at how well PNAC is going.

 

[a_unique_person]

So the latest Trump defense:

According to Dershowitz, there is nothing wrong with 'Quid pro quo' because the president thought it was in the country's best interest to get himself re-elected.

From: https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/29/politics/dershowitz-quid-pro-quo/index.html
...a politician trying to win reelection is acting in the national interest, and therefore a quid pro quo aimed at boosting reelection chances cannot be impeachable.

Trump's defense must be some sort of elaborate dare... "Lets put out the dumbest possible argument and see how the GOP reacts".

Like if I rob a bank it's just because I am doing what's best for my family.

 

[Stacyhs]

So the latest Trump defense:

According to Dershowitz, there is nothing wrong with 'Quid pro quo' because the president thought it was in the country's best interest to get himself re-elected.

From: https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/29/politics/dershowitz-quid-pro-quo/index.html
...a politician trying to win reelection is acting in the national interest, and therefore a quid pro quo aimed at boosting reelection chances cannot be impeachable.

Trump's defense must be some sort of elaborate dare... "Lets put out the dumbest possible argument and see how the GOP reacts".

They'll lap it up. I'm watching them do it right now. Not only will they lap it up, like Oliver Twist, they'll say "Please, sir. I want more."