• 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.

House Impeachment Inquiry

Status
Not open for further replies.
For all the concerns that this was going to hurt the Dems and piss off the electorate, the opposite seems true:

The tweet — one of many Tuesday morning — came as Trump and his Republican allies continued to push back against a rapidly moving impeachment inquiry and as polls showed public support for removing Trump from office on the rise.
Click to expand...
 
To be fair, and so I don't just come across as a total grump, I can imagine if you went back in time and said that the President who just won an election where the electoral map looked like this:

1972_large.png


: was going to be impeached (yeah, yeah not impeached "You can't fire me I quit" but... let's be real here impeached) in about 18 months would seem rather insane as well.
 
Belz... said:
You stand by a claim you demolished yourself. Ok.
Click to expand...
No, I think going back to being a rep is consistent with advancing her career. Which is to say, even though she's stepping down from the top post, she still has a career. She still has work to do, a reputation to protect, and a future to think of. She's at the point of her career where it's less about grabbing the next brass ring, and more about securing what she's earned and retiring on her own terms. This is all part of "career advancement", in my shorthand.

Your "demolition" is based entirely on insisting that I don't mean what I mean. This is foolish.

If you can think of a more apt term for what I'm describing, I'd love to see it. Meanwhile, I'm not wrong for using a (in your view) less apt term to describe what's going on.

If you think I'm wrong about what's going on, you'll have to argue that, not terminology. And especially not argue terminology now that you know what I mean by the term I'm using.
 
theprestige said:
No, I think going back to being a rep is consistent with advancing her career. Which is to say, even though she's stepping down from the top post, she still has a career.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure you're clear on what the word "advancement" means.

Your "demolition" is based entirely on insisting that I don't mean what I mean.
Click to expand...

No, it's based entirely on insisting that you mean what you say.
 
Belz... said:
I'm not sure you're clear on what the word "advancement" means.



No, it's based entirely on insisting that you mean what you say.
Click to expand...

Okay, so what would you call what Pelosi is doing to safeguard her career interests, at this point in her career?

Also, why is it more important for you to insist on me changing the way I say what I mean, than to engage with what you know I actually mean?
 
theprestige said:
Okay, so what would you call what Pelosi is doing to safeguard her career interests, at this point in her career?
Click to expand...

I'd call it exactly what you just wrote.

Also, why is it more important for you to insist on me changing the way I say what I mean, than to engage with what you know I actually mean?
Click to expand...

Because the only thing that I have to guess what you mean is what you say.
 
I Am The Scum said:
Really, isn't anyone with a job "advancing one's career?"
Click to expand...

Depends on the job, and depends on what they're doing with it. I'd say that in Pelosi's case, she's definitely charting a course through the impeachment question that serves her career goals. That safeguards what she's made of her career so far, and protects the potential for future opportunities.
 
Last edited:
theprestige said:
Depends on the job, and depends on what they're doing with it. I'd say that in Pelosi's case, she's definitely charting a course through the impeachment question that serves her career goals. That safeguards what she's made of her career so far, and protects the potential for future opportunities.
Click to expand...

So I take it you've levied similar criticism against Trump for deciding to run for re-election? After all, that would advance his career.
 
acbytesla said:
No, in fact they will not. If the house authorizes articles of impeachment, McConnell has already said there will be a trial.
Click to expand...

Didn't say there wouldn't be a trial.
But as the first order of business. Mitch can ask the Senate to dismiss the case, and they can and probably will.

That way, the Senate doesn't have to hear any piece of evidence.
 
I Am The Scum said:
So I take it you've levied similar criticism against Trump for deciding to run for re-election? After all, that would advance his career.
Click to expand...

One, there's nothing inherently wrong with advancing one's own interests. Two, I'm not criticizing Pelosi for working to protect her interest in the political career she's been building for the past several decades. Three, I see Trump more as having hobbies than having a career as such. But if you want to call what Trump is doing a career, then okay, sure: I levy exactly the same criticism at Trump that I do at Pelosi. Which is none.
 
theprestige said:
I'm sure that if she were planning to flip burgers at McDonalds, then carrying out that plan would be career advancement even under your definition.
Click to expand...

Gotta love wordplay. It sure beats making reasoned arguments or admitting to one's errors.

You don't have to guess, though: I've told you exactly what I mean. Repeatedly.
Click to expand...

Yes, through what you said. See how that works?
 
The Great Zaganza said:
Didn't say there wouldn't be a trial.
But as the first order of business. Mitch can ask the Senate to dismiss the case, and they can and probably will.

That way, the Senate doesn't have to hear any piece of evidence.
Click to expand...

You said dismiss. They will vote on impeachment. The Republicans face a huge problem after the House hearings. They will need to address the evidence that will be out there. Otherwise it will appear as a sham. Now that might not matter to the partisan base but it could matter very much to swing voters.
 
acbytesla said:
You said dismiss. They will vote on impeachment. The Republicans face a huge problem after the House hearings. They will need to address the evidence that will be out there. Otherwise it will appear as a sham.
Click to expand...

Not to their base, which is apparently the only voters they care about. Maybe they're going to rely on underhanded chicanery to get their way come 2020.
 
Belz... said:
Not to their base, which is apparently the only voters they care about. Maybe they're going to rely on underhanded chicanery to get their way come 2020.
Click to expand...

Nothing surprises me about the GOP any more.

But I wonder why you cut off my post.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom