The President of the US has been impeached

[m308gunner | 352]

4 minutes ago, Lincoln said:

I'll check into it if I remember. From what I know of him, he has some pretty out there ideas on various topics.

  Depending on the topic, there's left, far left, burying the needle, and THEN Scott Adams.

[Link | 2,708]

2 hours ago, Quest4Nes said:

A Libertarian siding with todays Democratic Party? 

 

Thats like a diehard nintendo kid buying a genesis. It goes against nearly everything. You dont have to side with a republican but jesus.

There’s different kinds of regulation.  The right wing loves to say the left infringes on peoples freedoms by taxes and pollution rules, but they will restrict peoples rights regarding drugs, abortion, and immigration with glee. Never mind where they’ll prize the right of the “individual” (not always a human being) over the collective right to safety and quality of life by other means. 

While I think the “taxation is theft” catchphrase is too simplistic at best, there’s really nothing so untoward about a libertarian leaning leftward. Diversity of opinion is a thing, isn’t it? You know me as lefty but I’m pretty disgusted by the Democrat party over the past 5 years.

[Link | 2,708]

1 hour ago, Wandering Tellurian said:

Do we want an electoral system where we could have 4 major contenders (or more) (which happened in 1824 and the election was thrown into the House of Representatives) and the most popular candidate  gets say 26% or 27% of the vote and is therefore the winner?  

In Chicago, in 2015, there were five candidates for mayor. In 2019, there were fourteen. (I only remember eight of them) Obviously, nobody had a majority in the general election. Both were followed by runoff elections later. I’m sure most people who favored the lesser candidates had second and third choices higher up the chain, as I did, and could find at least some representation in somebody on the final ballot. Maybe this is extra work, holding another election... or maybe we hold a general instead of primaries and runoff instead of general. 

Another way to do it is with weighted voting, in which everyone gets to vote for multiple candidates in a ranked order. My first choice usually doesn’t make it to the last election, but that doesn’t (always) mean I dislike everything about some others. I would like to see this in practice and think it could really resolve some issues we see in the current party system at the state and federal levels. 

[MrWunderful | 2,926]

1 hour ago, m308gunner said:

 I believe the actual wording was Obstruction of Congress? To my knowledge Trump claimed executive privilege over his conversations with one (or a few, I haven't been keeping track) of the witnesses Democrats wanted to interrogate. That point SHOULD have gone to the courts to decide, because one of their functions is to settle disputes between the branches, but apparently the Democrats didn't want to wait and rushed to accuse "Obstruction of Congress", which is not a thing.

  Question for all: Where do you get the majority of your knowledge of the proceedings and background information from? What news outlet? How much talking time do they show from each side? I ask because I'm struggling to understand some of the sentiments in this thread. From what I've seen a few of the more verbose Republicans have addressed, if not completely debunked, each of the Democratic talking points.

  Full disclosure: I've been listening to Scott Adams alot lately, who is a self described HUGE lefty, and he has been breaking down every single point the Democrats have brought up to a sobering degree. To say that he is absolutely disgusted with his own party would be an understatement. After watching the impeachment proceedings he stated that he "F#@%ing HATES" the democrats who are leading the investigation. I always thought he was just "the Dilbert guy", but have been surprised by his level of analysis on this subject and his full disclosure of his political leanings.  If you have the time I would recommend giving him a chance. You can find him on Youtube at Real Coffee with Scott Adams.

Looking at his youtube posts you could probably get his entire deconstruction of the affair by listening to about the last week or two.

Trumps Game is to tie shit up in courts for years, I can see why the Dems didnt bother waiting for that.  

He screwed so many people as a “developer” the same way -small contractors especially.  The people he falsely “represents”  

Im from the camp of “if you are telling the truth, then you got nothing to hide”

 

[Tulpa | 3,488]

29 minutes ago, Link said:

 

Another way to do it is with weighted voting, in which everyone gets to vote for multiple candidates in a ranked order. My first choice usually doesn’t make it to the last election, but that doesn’t (always) mean I dislike everything about some others. I would like to see this in practice and think it could really resolve some issues we see in the current party system at the state and federal levels. 

Agreed.

[m308gunner | 352]

25 minutes ago, MrWunderful said:

Trumps Game is to tie shit up in courts for years, I can see why the Dems didnt bother waiting for that.  

He screwed so many people as a “developer” the same way -small contractors especially.  The people he falsely “represents”  

Im from the camp of “if you are telling the truth, then you got nothing to hide”

 

  From his recent statements and the Dems now appearing to want to delay handing the proceedings over to the Senate, I don't think he is the one with that intention.

  And considering that we've just gone through 2+ years of the Muller Report and Dems constantly crying wolf over a smoking gun just over that next hill (we can all thank Adam Schiff for that), I don't think there's anything left to hide, or that truth has anything to do with what we're seeing.

[Psychobear85 | 141]

7 hours ago, Californication said:

It's been a while since I checked the polling, but I am pretty sure Bernie lead Trump by almost every poll ever.

Let’s get real here, Bernie isn’t going anywhere near the White House, he was the flavor of the month last election. 

[MrWunderful | 2,926]

15 minutes ago, m308gunner said:

  From his recent statements and the Dems now appearing to want to delay handing the proceedings over to the Senate, I don't think he is the one with that intention.

  And considering that we've just gone through 2+ years of the Muller Report and Dems constantly crying wolf over a smoking gun just over that next hill (we can all thank Adam Schiff for that), I don't think there's anything left to hide, or that truth has anything to do with what we're seeing.

Whos recent statements? Trump? Do you personally think Trump Can be trusted to be honest? If there’s nothing left to hide, let Bolton testify. Why don’t they release the actual transcript of the call?

 

There are so many ways Trump can stick this whole thing  up the Dems Ass,  if he is to believed. So why not do it and guarantee his re-election? Thats the thing I dont understand.  
 

I Would delay handing the articles over as well until I could make sure there is a fair trial. You have McConnell saying hes going to coordinate with the white house? Lindsey Graham outright saying hes not going to be a partial juror? Lol that is really terrible.  
 

Plus if they did hand the articles over now, you would have folks like Jim Jordan Screaming about how Libs dont care about the working mans Christmas, so they are screwed either way. 
 

The true republican party is gone. No more fiscal responsibility. No more standing up for whats right, having the moral high-ground. Its a true shame!
 

I don’t care for most of the Democrats spending, but I cannot stand the rank hypocrisy from the republican party anymore.  

[Lincoln | 230]

21 minutes ago, m308gunner said:

  From his recent statements and the Dems now appearing to want to delay handing the proceedings over to the Senate, I don't think he is the one with that intention.

  And considering that we've just gone through 2+ years of the Muller Report and Dems constantly crying wolf over a smoking gun just over that next hill (we can all thank Adam Schiff for that), I don't think there's anything left to hide, or that truth has anything to do with what we're seeing.

The house is delaying the start of the trial because McConnell has already declared he'll be working with the white house to fix things in their favor. Letting that happen accomplishes nothing.

Trials rarely having smoking guns in real life. What we do have is a mountain of evidence and testimony that demonstrates corrupt or criminal patterns and behaviors. 

None of this has been "crying wolf". The Mueller investigation directly led to several felony convictions. Trump himself is an unindicted conspirator identified by that investigation. 

The downside was that it covered too much ground to be easily digestible by the public. Hence the impeachment investigation focus on new crimes, and very narrow articles that everyone can understand and are very difficult to dispute.

[KokiriChild | 1,644]

I think it speaks volumes about the integrity of the modern day Republican party when 50-70% of the country supports impeachment and/or removal from office (Fox News' own poll holds the number at 54% - if Fox off all people have that as their figure, its safe to say a majority of the country feels this way) yet McConall and Lindsay Graham have openly said they will not be impartial. How can you even take an oath after that without outright admitting that the oath means shit? Whether you agree with impeachment or not, whether you are liberal or conservative, this should frighten us all immensely, as those comments (as well as the party-line voting itself) says one thing: Fuck the law, the Party in charge of the exective branch can do whatever the hell it wants. 

To see how far we as a nation have sunk, go watch Nixon's resignation speech and then read Trump's most recent Tweets. It makes it hard to stay optimistic about the fate of the country...

Edited December 20, 2019 by KokiriChild

[Lincoln | 230]

33 minutes ago, Bear85 said:

Let’s get real here, Bernie isn’t going anywhere near the White House, he was the flavor of the month last election. 

He was an outsider and the party was all in on Clinton basically from the start. He had a good showing. 

He's in second place nationally right now. He just needs to get to the point the media can't (literally) ignore him and the party can't try to push him aside any more. And Biden is basically sweating it out trying not to torpedo himself until voting.

[phart010 | 1,705]

9 hours ago, tbone3969 said:

What I really want to know is how this will impact the retro game market.  I am gonna have to ask Jim from Go Collect.

In all seriousness, we need Andrew Yang to be the next president. A perpetual  $1000 a month would be excellent for video game collection 

Yang 2020!

[Californication | 1,477]

1 hour ago, Bear85 said:

Let’s get real here, Bernie isn’t going anywhere near the White House, he was the flavor of the month last election. 

It's hard to take you guys seriously when you repeat catch phrases you hear on tv like they are your own opinion.

Bernie has been in the top 2 and 3 since he got in the race. Bernie has the most steady voting base while fighting an up hill battle. Joe Biden is only ahead of him because people hear his name and associate him with Obama. Also, any other democratic candidate is more likely to lose against Donald Trump.

I don't know if Bernie will win, its a tough primary. If Bernie loses we all lose including everyone who wanted to make america great again.

The biggest problem is there is a disconnect between the average voter, what Bernie is offering, and why he is the only candidate that may be able to achieve his goals.

Edited December 20, 2019 by Californication

[m308gunner | 352]

1 hour ago, MrWunderful said:

Whos recent statements? Trump? Do you personally think Trump Can be trusted to be honest? If there’s nothing left to hide, let Bolton testify. Why don’t they release the actual transcript of the call?

 

There are so many ways Trump can stick this whole thing  up the Dems Ass,  if he is to believed. So why not do it and guarantee his re-election? Thats the thing I dont understand.  
 

I Would delay handing the articles over as well until I could make sure there is a fair trial. You have McConnell saying hes going to coordinate with the white house? Lindsey Graham outright saying hes not going to be a partial juror? Lol that is really terrible.  
 

Plus if they did hand the articles over now, you would have folks like Jim Jordan Screaming about how Libs dont care about the working mans Christmas, so they are screwed either way. 
 

The true republican party is gone. No more fiscal responsibility. No more standing up for whats right, having the moral high-ground. Its a true shame!
 

I don’t care for most of the Democrats spending, but I cannot stand the rank hypocrisy from the republican party anymore.  

Trump said about three weeks ago that we wants a Senate trial, presumably because then Republicans could call all the witnesses they want, including Schiff and the Bidens. 

I trust Trump to be directionally honest, in that he generally aims towards at what he considers the truth (which always comes with a handful of salt) and he has one of the best presidential records in history at keeping his campaign promises (even the Washington Post admitted that). What I do not expect from him is factual honesty.

The transcript seems to be available here -https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Unclassified09.2019.pdf

  There are a few ways to maximize the force of said suppository, but I'm not privy to his inner circle's political strategy. Really, he doesn't need to do much at this point, as I believe the Dems have tipped their hand so much that their destruction is all but assured. 

  The Dems have not portrayed any willingness for a "fair trial" and have historically used the Republican's penchant for following rules against them for the last 60+ years, so they can stow their crocodile tears for the present. They have, in my estimation, fully explained why the Dems have no case, and since they seem fully convinced in their own minds that there is nothing to support this impeachment I would fully expect them to coordinate against a bad-faith impeachment. I would expect the same were the roles changed.

  I REALLY don't think Jim Jordan would be screaming about that. He'd be too busy dismantling the weak "logic" the Dems are using to prop up the impeachment.  And I think we can all agree at the very least the man is fun to watch.

  Totally agree that the true republican party is gone. That is one of the many predictions that Scott Adams made (yeah, I harp on him. Flavor of the minute and all). 

  I would think that if hypocrisy bothers you then you would find the Democrats absolutely abhorrent, especially what with all the false "this is a solemn moment" and "we don't take this lightly". Seriously, watch this - 

 

[Psychobear85 | 141]

51 minutes ago, Californication said:

It's hard to take you guys seriously when you repeat catch phrases you hear on tv like they are your own opinion.

It is my opinion and for you to dismiss it cause “I heard it on TV” it’s a bit harsh. Don’t get mad cause I’m telling you the truth. Majority of the people I know that supported him last election no longer supports him. Almost everyone moved on cause they see no hope in him. Honestly I don’t see anyone in the Democratic Party winning against Trump. Especially Bernie. 

 

 

[Californication | 1,477]

7 minutes ago, Bear85 said:

It is my opinion and for you to dismiss it cause “I heard it on TV” it’s a bit harsh. Don’t get mad cause I’m telling you the truth. Majority of the people I know that supported him last election no longer supports him. Almost everyone moved on cause they see no hope in him. Honestly I don’t see anyone in the Democratic Party winning against Trump. Especially Bernie. 

It really does come down to the media. His main policy is medicare for all. Who doesn't want free health care except because the misinformation and disinformation about it. If you ask people the question the rogjt way and honestly tell them about the policy and its cost it gets over 70% approval at times.
 

 

This is from memory, but I think there are two main groups Bernie does not do well with: older white voters like >50 and educated white voters.

Other than that Bernie has a pretty solid base of support. 

Edited December 20, 2019 by Californication

[a3quit4s | 4,093]

7 minutes ago, Californication said:

This is from memory, but I think there are two main groups Bernie does not do well with: older white voters like >50 and educated white voters.

Other than that Bernie has a pretty solid base of support. 

I have a hard time believing that - doesn’t he want to wipe out their college debt? I say “their” like I’m not an educated white voter with college debt Bernie can feel free to wipe out.

[m308gunner | 352]

1 hour ago, Lincoln said:

The house is delaying the start of the trial because McConnell has already declared he'll be working with the white house to fix things in their favor. Letting that happen accomplishes nothing.

Trials rarely having smoking guns in real life. What we do have is a mountain of evidence and testimony that demonstrates corrupt or criminal patterns and behaviors. 

None of this has been "crying wolf". The Mueller investigation directly led to several felony convictions. Trump himself is an unindicted conspirator identified by that investigation. 

The downside was that it covered too much ground to be easily digestible by the public. Hence the impeachment investigation focus on new crimes, and very narrow articles that everyone can understand and are very difficult to dispute.

 Since it seems to be widely known that the whistleblower was associating with Schiff and his staff long before this incident, and how the Democrats have conducted themselves during the closed hearings I don't lend much credence to their opinions on fairness.

 In regards to the mountain of evidence and testimony, I guess it's true that two people can see the same thing and come away with a completely different interpretation. Trump, as the president, has an obligation to route out corruption when he sees or hears about it. The argument that he was trying to use his office and/or foreign aid to bully a foreign country to investigate a political rival is dubious at best. It doesn't matter if Biden was a political rival or not. In fact, Trump was acting in the best interests of the nation in making sure a future political candidate was not beholden to a foreign nation. That's one of his obligations as the executive branch. And if someone asks why Trump only acted when Biden was riding higher in the polls is missing a critical point. If Biden was not riding higher there would be no point in an investigation of him and his son because there would be little danger in someone compromised by a foreign government getting into the oval office. If Biden sinks, no need for investigation (functionally, unless your aim is pure "justice"), if Biden rises, full need for investigation because the risk rises in pace, assuming there's some corruption there.

  Schiff was basically camping out at CNN and MSNBC during the Mueller years teasing the country with tidbits of "I've seen evidence that will lead to X". The felony convictions from the Mueller probe almost all amount to a special prosecutor being able to run roughshod over people and prosecute them for anything, even if it's not related to the original intent of the probe (which is the majority of what we find when we look at the charges). Forget one detail or miss-characterize one interaction and it can be turned against you as having been a deliberate act, which is why so many people plead the 5th.

  The Ukraine affair is basically Russia 2.0. The Dems have been telegraphing their play from the beginning (or right before) Trump became president before he had a chance to say boo. 

[MrWunderful | 2,926]

41 minutes ago, m308gunner said:

Trump said about three weeks ago that we wants a Senate trial, presumably because then Republicans could call all the witnesses they want, including Schiff and the Bidens. 

I trust Trump to be directionally honest, in that he generally aims towards at what he considers the truth (which always comes with a handful of salt) and he has one of the best presidential records in history at keeping his campaign promises (even the Washington Post admitted that). What I do not expect from him is factual honesty.

The transcript seems to be available here -https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Unclassified09.2019.pdf

  There are a few ways to maximize the force of said suppository, but I'm not privy to his inner circle's political strategy. Really, he doesn't need to do much at this point, as I believe the Dems have tipped their hand so much that their destruction is all but assured. 

  The Dems have not portrayed any willingness for a "fair trial" and have historically used the Republican's penchant for following rules against them for the last 60+ years, so they can stow their crocodile tears for the present. They have, in my estimation, fully explained why the Dems have no case, and since they seem fully convinced in their own minds that there is nothing to support this impeachment I would fully expect them to coordinate against a bad-faith impeachment. I would expect the same were the roles changed.

  I REALLY don't think Jim Jordan would be screaming about that. He'd be too busy dismantling the weak "logic" the Dems are using to prop up the impeachment.  And I think we can all agree at the very least the man is fun to watch.

  Totally agree that the true republican party is gone. That is one of the many predictions that Scott Adams made (yeah, I harp on him. Flavor of the minute and all). 

  I would think that if hypocrisy bothers you then you would find the Democrats absolutely abhorrent, especially what with all the false "this is a solemn moment" and "we don't take this lightly". Seriously, watch this - 

 

I see it completely different I guess. I happen to think Jim Jordan is an absolutely terrible person, and dont find any of the far right wing show ponies like Him, or Gaetz’s antics humorous.   Its all for twitter or the donald reddit or whatever. 
 

I personally think Trump has done far too much damage to our country to let him get away with trying to strong arm an ally for political gain. 
 

where you see “logic” I see theatrics and pandering to Trump (same with fox news)
 

I do feel that the democrats do not want to impeach Trump- I always thought they could trick him into siding with them by just flattering him. 

[Tulpa | 3,488]

9 minutes ago, m308gunner said:

 

 In regards to the mountain of evidence and testimony, I guess it's true that two people can see the same thing and come away with a completely different interpretation. Trump, as the president, has an obligation to route out corruption when he sees or hears about it. The argument that he was trying to use his office and/or foreign aid to bully a foreign country to investigate a political rival is dubious at best. It doesn't matter if Biden was a political rival or not.

If his intent was to do an investigation, Trump wouldn't have asked Zelensky to announce an investigation to the public. He'd just have the investigation take place. The fact that he wanted an announcement, in public, was clearly to hurt Biden in the polls. That's what got Trump in trouble.

[MrWunderful | 2,926]

3 minutes ago, Tulpa said:

If his intent was to do an investigation, Trump wouldn't have asked Zelensky to announce an investigation to the public. He'd just have the investigation take place. The fact that he wanted an announcement, in public, was clearly to hurt Biden in the polls. That's what got Trump in trouble.

Isnt that what they hinged the whole white house trip on? That he announce it publicly? 
 

I would think a non public investigation would be more effective. Also curious why he had Giuliani doing all this stuff instead of the state department.  

[m308gunner | 352]

2 minutes ago, MrWunderful said:

I see it completely different I guess. I happen to think Jim Jordan is an absolutely terrible person, and dont find any of the right wing show ponies like Him, or Gaetz’s antics humorous. 
 

I personally think Trump has done far too much damage to our country to let him get away with trying to strong arm an ally for political gain. 
 

where you see “logic” I see theatrics and pandering to Trump (same with fox news)
 

I do feel that the democrats do not want to impeach Trump- I always thought they could trick him into siding with them by just flattering him. 

Interesting. Whenever I typically see Jim Jordan he's repeating a democratic point and then offering countervailing evidence that, in my mind at least, proves the Dems wrong. That is where I see "logic". Wouldn't that be considered a reasonable definition of logic?

I'm genuinely interested in what damage you believe Trump has done to the country, and question your interpretation of strong arming an ally for political gain. I believe it was in one of Jordan's more recent tirades that he debunked this line of thinking, siting two sources from Ukraine (including the president) that reported feeling no pressure. 

 As for political gain, personally I don't care what Trump's motives were (especially since I can't read minds) as long as it was good for the country. And finding out if a potential presidential candidate is compromised by a foreign power is the essence of that. 

 Right after voting the first article of impeachment Pelosi could visibly barely hold back a smile and had to wave down the Democrats who had  started to cheer. They have been saying for years that they have wanted this.

 

[m308gunner | 352]

7 minutes ago, Tulpa said:

If his intent was to do an investigation, Trump wouldn't have asked Zelensky to announce an investigation to the public. He'd just have the investigation take place. The fact that he wanted an announcement, in public, was clearly to hurt Biden in the polls. That's what got Trump in trouble.

  What with the Democrats trumpeting for years about investigations every which way from Tuesday (with the sole intent of hurting Trump politically) I can't fault him for that, honestly. I don't like it, but...

[MrWunderful | 2,926]

11 minutes ago, m308gunner said:

Interesting. Whenever I typically see Jim Jordan he's repeating a democratic point and then offering countervailing evidence that, in my mind at least, proves the Dems wrong. That is where I see "logic". Wouldn't that be considered a reasonable definition of logic?

I'm genuinely interested in what damage you believe Trump has done to the country, and question your interpretation of strong arming an ally for political gain. I believe it was in one of Jordan's more recent tirades that he debunked this line of thinking, siting two sources from Ukraine (including the president) that reported feeling no pressure. 

 As for political gain, personally I don't care what Trump's motives were (especially since I can't read minds) as long as it was good for the country. And finding out if a potential presidential candidate is compromised by a foreign power is the essence of that. 

 Right after voting the first article of impeachment Pelosi could visibly barely hold back a smile and had to wave down the Democrats who had  started to cheer. They have been saying for years that they have wanted this.

 

He encourages animosity. 
He constantly insults people, including handicapped and deceased. 
 

Im not going to bother to name anymore, because if you cant see them, Im not going to convince you, its all good. 
 

Who are the two “Ukrainian” sources? Sorry but I just dont Trust Trump to tell the truth. He lies about things that are obvious an known to be incorrect. 
zZelenski wants nothing to do with any of this, of course he is going to take the path of least resistance. 

[Tulpa | 3,488]

9 minutes ago, m308gunner said:

  What with the Democrats trumpeting for years about investigations every which way from Tuesday (with the sole intent of hurting Trump politically) I can't fault him for that, honestly. I don't like it, but...

Well, I can fault him for that.

 

19 minutes ago, MrWunderful said:

Isnt that what they hinged the whole white house trip on? That he announce it publicly? 
 

I would think a non public investigation would be more effective. Also curious why he had Giuliani doing all this stuff instead of the state department.  

Yeah, pretty much.