"Ladies and Gentlemen, We Got Him!"

[The Great Zaganza]

Literally?

As has been pointed out, figuratively, they lost their manhood long ago.
Nailing their detached scrotums to the door of the Senate should make this fact clear to everyone.

 

[thaiboxerken]

Cohen's statement about acting with the knowledge and direction of Despot Donald Trump means far far more than just the things Cohen did. it establishes precedent.

Now go back and re-read the reporting from the early days of the Mueller probe on Manafort's emails saying the campaign needed to send someone "low" to the Russians so as to not "send a signal".

Also Papadopolous' statements that Trump was well aware of and encouraged his conspiring with the Russians.

Donald J Trump is guilty of Treason, conspiracy with a foreign power, and subverting the 2016 election. The "election" is therefore invalid.

Hillary Clinton is our rightful President.

If our country was one of the rule of law, you'd be correct. However, it is of the rule of politics, and since the GOP has control, I doubt Trump will suffer any consequence no matter what crimes are proven. He could rape a baby on the senate floor and they wouldn't impeach him.

 

[acbytesla]

So, the house votes to impeach.(Impeach means "to investigate") But doesn't the Senate get in on the Guilty! vote?

Yes. Consider the impeachment hearings in the House to be the equivalent of a Grand Jury. They decide whether or not to impeach/indict POTUS and then the Senate conducts a trial whether or not to remove him from his office.

But think of it this way. Those hearings would likely be both public and televised. If significant evidence is presented, the GOP is not going to look good conducting a sham trial and acting partisan.

 

[theprestige]

Citizenship was never the putative problem. It was about where certain loonies say he was born.

Actually, in this context it's about how those loonies thought that proving his non-citizenship would automatically invalidate the election and automatically install their nominee in his place.

And thus it's also about how these loonies think that proving Russian collusion will automatically invalidate Trump's election and automatically install Hillary Clinton in his place.

---

And this illustrates one of the classic failure modes of an argument by analogy: Even when the analogy is sound, and the elements being compared between the two are properly analogous, people still get so confused and distracted by the effort of mapping the one thing to the other that they completely miss what a perfectly cromulent point.

 

[theprestige]

Yes. Consider the impeachment hearings in the House to be the equivalent of a Grand Jury. They decide whether or not to impeach/indict POTUS and then the Senate conducts a trial whether or not to remove him from his office.

Nope. The House presents its case to the Senate, and the Senate votes. The Senate does not conduct the trial. The trial is a joint activity of both chambers.

If you insist on trying to do this by analogy, instead of in terms of the thing itself, this is closer to the truth: The House is the prosecutor, deciding whether or not they have a case. And the Senate is like the jury, hearing the case and issuing a verdict. But there's no judge, no defense lawyer, etc. So the analogy to other courtroom procedures breaks down fairly quickly, unless you're prepared to grasp its point and move on.

 

[theprestige]

As has been pointed out, figuratively, they lost their manhood long ago.

Nailing their detached scrotums to the door of the Senate should make this fact clear to everyone.

That feeling when a champion of progress sums up all that is good and true in a politician as "manhood".

At least this forum is starting to get its Psychosexual Revenge Porn mojo back.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

How else to describe the party of Values that abandoned everything moral to get a terrible person into the White House?

 

[Leftus]

Yes, by the letter of the law, Trump wouldn't be guilty of "treason", because that charge specifically refers to actions during war time.

Actually, it requires an "owing allegiance" to the US. Trump, who was nothing more than a citizen at the time, well, it would be hard to stretch citizenship into owing some sort of allegiance. As well as a specific enemy. Russia is not our enemy.

I left off the other stuff as it's likely correct. But as someone who see's the charge of Treason in every SovCit complaint, I grow weary of it.

 

[theprestige]

How else to describe the party of Values that abandoned everything moral to get a terrible person into the White House?

Might I suggest not using gendered language that equates being a good person with being a man?

 

[Stacyhs]

I suspect that Cohen would not have made this claim regarding Trump telling him to lie to Congress if he didn't have texts/emails or something else to back it up. He knows he has a credibility problem. So far, I haven't seen Cohen denying this Buzzfeed claim. On the other hand, the WH is denying it. Which leads me to believe it's true.

 

[kellyb]

Might I suggest not using gendered language that equates being a good person with being a man?

You'd make a fantastic SJW, seriously (and I'm fine with most SJWs, tbh.)

lol

 

[theprestige]

You'd make a fantastic SJW, seriously (and I'm fine with most SJWs, tbh.)



lol

You're confusing my knack for code switching with actual support for your ideology.

 

[Cabbage]

I'm not sure if that's necessarily true about a presidential candidate. A president-elect, though, quite rightly starts talking to his foreign counterparts before he takes office. I think you'll find that every modern president-elect, from Obama on back, has met with the Russians before taking office.

How many of them lied about the meetings and tried to cover them up?

 

[applecorped]

Passing peak Trump?

 

[applecorped]

That feeling when a champion of progress sums up all that is good and true in a politician as "manhood".

At least this forum is starting to get its Psychosexual Revenge Porn mojo back.

 

[kellyb]

You're confusing my knack for code switching with actual support for your ideology.

Not mistaking it. That was the "apostrophe D" in "You'd". You WOULD. Not "you ARE".

 

[Minoosh]

Actually, in this context it's about how those loonies thought that proving his non-citizenship would automatically invalidate the election and automatically install their nominee in his place.

And thus it's also about how these loonies think that proving Russian collusion will automatically invalidate Trump's election and automatically install Hillary Clinton in his place.

---

And this illustrates one of the classic failure modes of an argument by analogy: Even when the analogy is sound, and the elements being compared between the two are properly analogous, people still get so confused and distracted by the effort of mapping the one thing to the other that they completely miss what a perfectly cromulent point.

I'm not sure what analogy you're talking about.

The birther-type people probably wouldn't have wanted McCain in office either, because of his position on immigration. Maybe they would have liked Romney better. I never stopped to wonder what remedy birthers sought. I must have figured that harassing Obama was an end in itself.

 

[Minoosh]

Passing peak Trump?

If God is merciful.

 

[Beerina]

Is there a way Pelosi could actually become president out of this?

I do recognize that Trump is almost certainly guilty (as sure as you can be), and under normal circumstances would be impeached and removed from office. I also recognize (with almost as much certainty) that Pence is also guilty of various crimes.

But, would the 2 of them be removed simultaneously? Or would Trump get impeached, Pence becomes president, then he appoints his own VP right before he himself gets impeached (and that VP becomes the new president).

It's unlikely, no matter how bad Pence is, the Republicans in the Senate would allow a near-simultaneous removal.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

If God is merciful.

Empirical evidence suggests otherwise.