Author Topic: Ukraine Scandal / Impeachment Investigation  (Read 20177 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline gmillerdrake

  • Proud Father.....Blessed Husband
  • DTF.org Member
  • *
  • Posts: 15907
  • Gender: Male
  • 1 Timothy 2:5
Re: Ukraine Scandal / Impeachment Investigation
« Reply #350 on: February 03, 2020, 01:17:54 PM »
If you look at someone for as long and as hard and as detailed as they have at trump over this three and a half years.....everyone will be found in breaking 'some' law out there.
No, not everyone.  Only people that do a lot of shady shit. 

Can't get caught if you aren't doing anything wrong.

True. But even in the wake of the Patriot Act and all the Freedoms we 'gave' up in pursuit and protection from the bad guys.....I'd be willing to be that every member on this forum is guilty of a Federal crime when it came down to it.

And, your kidding yourself if you don't think 99.9% of our elected officials aren't involved in ' a lot of shady shit' that would qualify as a crime.....including past presidents.
Dude, I committed a federal crime before breakfast this morning. That's not really the point, though. I'm not comparable to Trump, nor should I be held to the same standard (though the imbalance is starkly backward from how it should be). The point is whether people in similar situations would behave similarly. You hated Barack Obama. Do you honestly think for a second he would have unlawfully seized funds allocated by congress in an attempt to get dirt on Romney? Bush? Clinton? Bush? None of them would have because they all had a functional understanding of what their official power was. As I've said, this isn't about Trump being crooked or corrupt. This was about Trump having no clue that what he was doing was wrong because he simply doesn't understand his role as head of the executive branch. We kid around about Jack Nicholson and "you can't handle the truth." Donald Trump wants nothing more than to boast that he did it, he's proud of it, and he'd do it again, because in his world there was nothing wrong with it and other presidents were losers for not doing the same thing.

Again EB....I'm not arguing against what you're stating here. My only push back is I hated obama's presidency....I didn't/don't 'hate' the man. He's a decent human being. Which can't be said about trump. I totally agree that trumps lack of civility and basic understanding of what it means to be an American President makes one want to vomit.....and has repeatedly placed him in the cross hairs. Will not argue against that.

I will argue that the entire agenda from the Dems since post day 1 of trumps presidency has been to get him removed....as they've boasted about.....and that none of their actions or allegations since then have been any way connected to protecting america or in pursuit of truth and justice. They do not hold the necessary credibility to believe anything other than the entire attempt(s) to take out trump are nothing more than vengefully motivated. This is not to suggest that means the Repubs are by default 'credible'.....only that this narrative that somehow the Dems are trying to defend all that is right for america is a crock of crap.
Without Faith.....Without Hope.....There can be No Peace of Mind

Offline The Walrus

  • goo goo g'joob
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 17221
  • PSA: Stairway to Heaven is in 4/4
Re: Ukraine Scandal / Impeachment Investigation
« Reply #351 on: February 03, 2020, 01:19:51 PM »
and that none of their actions or allegations since then have been any way connected to protecting america or in pursuit of truth and justice

This is exactly what Stadler said but in different words. "Democrats aren't interested in the truth or justice." And, respectfully, it's wrong.
From a Mega Man Legends island jamming power metal to a Walrus listening to black metal, I like your story arc.
"I don't worry about nothing, no, 'cause worrying's a waste of my time"

Online Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 28825
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: Ukraine Scandal / Impeachment Investigation
« Reply #352 on: February 03, 2020, 01:21:38 PM »
Spineless republicans, every single one of them who voted against bringing in witnesses. Collins and Romney were the only ones who voted yea.

Be clear here:  voted against bringing ONE PARTICULAR witness.  ONE PARTICULAR witness.   Let's not pretend even for a second that the Democrats intended or would have allowed a full slate of witnesses.   It was about BOLTON.   Why would you support only allowing information that HURT you, and not allowing information that might HELP you?   I'm a process guy: I think witnesses are crucial, but I don't support that singular request by the House Managers.  You have to take the good with the bad.  Either ALL witnesses, or NO witnesses, not this meally-mouthed, agenda-driving bullshit that was presented.

Appreciate the effort, but you're so staunchly republican and anti-democrat in this that I'm kind of sighing at the idea of replying to this. A trial should have witnesses. That's all.

You're not gonna change my mind on the optics by insisting that the dems have done all sorts of things wrong, and the republicans are trying to respect law, because you said, verbatim, the democrats "aren't interested in truth or justice." Recognize your own bias for a change

I would if it was there.  I respectfully say that unless and until you get my arguement correct, you're not able to see if there's really bias there or not. 

I haven't once, I don't think, said that the "Republicans are respecting the law".  They're pissing on it every bit as much as the Democrats are, in their own way.  But one, there are plenty of people here pointing out how bad the GOP is, you don't need me piling on, and two the Republicans aren't now the ones putting the Constitution on trial.   This is ADAM SCHIFF saying that Trump is not "above the law", and simultaneously saying "I don't need to listen to the courts I can do what I want."   That's a huge problem for me.  You can't pick and choose your sanctimony.  It's like being mad at your girl for winking at the guy at the drive through while you're banging your secretary. 

I've also apologized to you - elsewhere - for my potential ambiguity, but I don't think I've ever said "Democrats" - as in all 40+ million voters - don't care about "truth" or "justice", but I do readily admit that ADAM SCHIFF doesn't care about either, because he wasn't willing to address truths that didn't fit his narrative.   Whether you or I think the Biden's are relevant or not, it would have been simple: "Sure, you can depose the Biden's all day long and into next Tuesday.  We want to depose Bolton.", and that's TRUTH.  Let the facts go where they may.   And I point HIM out because he's the one accusing Trump et. al of COVERING UP the truth.  Again, you can't have it both ways.   To the extent that "Adam Schiff" means the "House Managers", or other Representatives involved in the process, then sure.  "Democrats".  Certainly I mean to include those that announced the day he won the election that he needed to be impeached, as well as those who won their election and announced in so many words that "we" need to impeach that motherf******r.   I can only assume "we" means "Democrats".

Offline gmillerdrake

  • Proud Father.....Blessed Husband
  • DTF.org Member
  • *
  • Posts: 15907
  • Gender: Male
  • 1 Timothy 2:5
Re: Ukraine Scandal / Impeachment Investigation
« Reply #353 on: February 03, 2020, 01:22:59 PM »
and that none of their actions or allegations since then have been any way connected to protecting america or in pursuit of truth and justice

This is exactly what Stadler said but in different words. "Democrats aren't interested in the truth or justice." And, respectfully, it's wrong.

Says you. That's how you see it. I see it differently....based off of comments made by Dem reps. who said they'll remove him by any means necessary....then lobbed claim after claim after him until finally one took longer to fall off the wall than the others.
Without Faith.....Without Hope.....There can be No Peace of Mind

Online Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 28825
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: Ukraine Scandal / Impeachment Investigation
« Reply #354 on: February 03, 2020, 01:23:43 PM »
Spineless republicans, every single one of them who voted against bringing in witnesses. Collins and Romney were the only ones who voted yea.

Be clear here:  voted against bringing ONE PARTICULAR witness.  ONE PARTICULAR witness.   Let's not pretend even for a second that the Democrats intended or would have allowed a full slate of witnesses.   It was about BOLTON. 

They also voted against acting chief of staff Mick Mulvaney, Robert Blair, a Mulvaney adviser, and Michael Duffey.

Quote
Why would you support only allowing information that HURT you, and not allowing information that might HELP you?

A 'yes' vote by the GOP would have allowed them to request witnesses of their choosing as well, no?

Not to my knowledge; I need to read the motion to be sure, but the early proposal I saw was to allow HOUSE MANAGERS to call witnesses, but the defense could only cross-examine, and not call their own witnesses.  In other words, it's my understanding that the Biden's and/or Adam Schiff (or his staff) were off limits.   

Online Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 28825
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: Ukraine Scandal / Impeachment Investigation
« Reply #355 on: February 03, 2020, 01:32:42 PM »
If you look at someone for as long and as hard and as detailed as they have at trump over this three and a half years.....everyone will be found in breaking 'some' law out there.
No, not everyone.  Only people that do a lot of shady shit. 

Can't get caught if you aren't doing anything wrong.

True. But even in the wake of the Patriot Act and all the Freedoms we 'gave' up in pursuit and protection from the bad guys.....I'd be willing to be that every member on this forum is guilty of a Federal crime when it came down to it.

And, your kidding yourself if you don't think 99.9% of our elected officials aren't involved in ' a lot of shady shit' that would qualify as a crime.....including past presidents.
Dude, I committed a federal crime before breakfast this morning. That's not really the point, though. I'm not comparable to Trump, nor should I be held to the same standard (though the imbalance is starkly backward from how it should be). The point is whether people in similar situations would behave similarly. You hated Barack Obama. Do you honestly think for a second he would have unlawfully seized funds allocated by congress in an attempt to get dirt on Romney? Bush? Clinton? Bush? None of them would have because they all had a functional understanding of what their official power was. As I've said, this isn't about Trump being crooked or corrupt. This was about Trump having no clue that what he was doing was wrong because he simply doesn't understand his role as head of the executive branch. We kid around about Jack Nicholson and "you can't handle the truth." Donald Trump wants nothing more than to boast that he did it, he's proud of it, and he'd do it again, because in his world there was nothing wrong with it and other presidents were losers for not doing the same thing.

I want to be clear on one thing, though: I THINK Trump committed an impeachable offense. More than one, actually.   Fundamental to what I believe, though, is that what I think is immaterial.   What you think, what Gary thinks, what SCHIFF thinks, are all immaterial.  What can one PROVE in a suitable forum is all that matters.  I don't think that the Democrats (read: Schiff, and the House Managers) did that.  I just don't.  That's not to say that they COULDN'T have, they just didn't.  They took the easy road, they played on subjective emotions and not cold facts, and they betrayed their hands too often.   Schiff was playing checkers, and the Sekulow/Cipollone/Purpura/Philbin in particular were playing chess. They CERTAINLY did not prove obstruction of Congress; it's well-settled law that you cannot be held criminally liable for legally exercising your rights under the Constitution.  This isn't partisan subjectivity, it's a simple fact, like 2+2=4.  It's mechanical. 

Online Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 28825
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: Ukraine Scandal / Impeachment Investigation
« Reply #356 on: February 03, 2020, 01:34:29 PM »
and that none of their actions or allegations since then have been any way connected to protecting america or in pursuit of truth and justice

This is exactly what Stadler said but in different words. "Democrats aren't interested in the truth or justice." And, respectfully, it's wrong.

You keep saying that; I've given hard proof why I say what I've said, but what's your proof?   How do you answer that if he was for "justice", he'd let the Courts reach their verdict?  The Federal courts are the very basis of justice in this country. How can you possibly be for justice if you ignore the courts entirely? 

Offline Dave_Manchester

  • Posts: 1592
Re: Ukraine Scandal / Impeachment Investigation
« Reply #357 on: February 03, 2020, 02:31:18 PM »

Do you honestly think for a second he would have unlawfully seized funds allocated by congress in an attempt to get dirt on Romney? Bush? Clinton? Bush? None of them would have because they all had a functional understanding of what their official power was. As I've said, this isn't about Trump being crooked or corrupt. This was about Trump having no clue that what he was doing was wrong because he simply doesn't understand his role as head of the executive branch.

In October last year, John Kelly (arguably the last competent person remaining in the West Wing before he quit) gave a speech at a summit organised by the Washington Examiner. During his speech he described a President who constantly needed to be told that his orders couldn't be carried out, because they were against the law. He spoke about his concerns that without someone to stop him, Trump would inevitably end up committing a crime:

I said, "Whatever you do - and we were still in the process of trying to find someone to take my place - I said, "Whatever you do, don't hire a yes-man, someone who won't tell you the truth. Don't do that. Because if you do, I believe you will be impeached".

Trump naturally took to Twitter to denounce Kelly as an incompetent fool (John Kelly was a 4-star General who led the United States Southern Command before Trump made him White House Chief of Staff), and his new sycophantic 'press secretary' Stephanie Grisham stated "I worked with John Kelly, and he was totally unequipped to handle the genius of our great president" (again, John Kelly is a career military leader of first-rate strategic intelligence; President Trump is confused about where Kansas City is; and Stephanie Grisham is exactly the kind of slavish toady Kelly warned him against hiring).

We also had the example of James Mattis (4-star General, former Commander of United States Central Command before Trump made him Secretary of Defence) who told the story of the time Trump instructed him to "screw Amazon" out of a lucrative contract because he was angry at coverage about him in The Washington Post, owned by his long-time nemesis Jeff Bezos (this is actually one of the cases for which the Mueller investigation concluded that Trump had tried to persuade aides to lie and obstruct justice). Mattis pointed out to Trump that what he was asking was illegal. Sure enough, Mattis was let go and Trump did what always comes naturally to him: he attacked him by calling him "the world's most overrated General" (Trump, remember, is a guy who when it suits him projects himself as the great saviour and defender of United States military personnel. McCain was a loser for getting captured, Kelly can't keep up with Trump's genius, and Mattis is the most overrated General in the world. 3 of the most impressively-decorated American servicemen of the last 50 years right there).

And then we had Rex Tillerson, former Secretary of State, who in December 2018 almost exactly corroborated Kelly's experience of President Trump when he said this:

"So often, the President would say here's what I want to do and here's how I want to do it and I would have to say to him, Mr. President I understand what you want to do but you can't do it that way. It violates the law."

You know the drill by now; Trump took to Twitter and denounced Tillerson thus:

"Rex Tillerson didn’t have the mental capacity needed to be Secretary of State. He was dumb as a rock and I couldn’t get rid of him fast enough. He was lazy as hell"

(Tillerson was made CEO of ExxonMobil after first joining the company in 1975 and was very highly spoken of in the State Department when he left; Donald Trump on the other hand has the vocabulary of a 6-year-old and is incapable of speaking in complex sentences). 

 
The picture that is consistently painted of Donald Trump by people who have spoken out against him since leaving his Administration is of a man who is 1) extraordinarily limited in his knowledge of the world, and 2) unpracticed in not getting what he wants. This is clearly not a good combination, and one that leads to him summarily firing people who tell him things he doesn't like to hear and replacing them with subservient lapdogs like Mick Mulvaney, Mike Pompeo and Mark Esper. John Kelly warned that Trump was always just a stone's throw away from committing impeachable acts. It turns out he needn't have worried; Marco Rubio's hilarious statement on why he was voting to acquit Trump suggests that nobody cares anymore about such things.
« Last Edit: February 03, 2020, 02:44:37 PM by Dave_Manchester »
"As democracy is perfected, the office of President represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their hearts' desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron" - H.L.Mencken, 26th July 1920.

"China has total respect for Donald Trump and for Donald Trump's very very large brain" - American President Donald Trump, 26th September 2018.

Offline The Walrus

  • goo goo g'joob
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 17221
  • PSA: Stairway to Heaven is in 4/4
Re: Ukraine Scandal / Impeachment Investigation
« Reply #358 on: February 03, 2020, 02:55:13 PM »
and that none of their actions or allegations since then have been any way connected to protecting america or in pursuit of truth and justice

This is exactly what Stadler said but in different words. "Democrats aren't interested in the truth or justice." And, respectfully, it's wrong.

You keep saying that; I've given hard proof why I say what I've said, but what's your proof?   How do you answer that if he was for "justice", he'd let the Courts reach their verdict?  The Federal courts are the very basis of justice in this country. How can you possibly be for justice if you ignore the courts entirely?

Huh. Seems to me like everyone in that chamber let the trial proceed. Seems to me if it wasn't fair, it would've been shut down at some point.
From a Mega Man Legends island jamming power metal to a Walrus listening to black metal, I like your story arc.
"I don't worry about nothing, no, 'cause worrying's a waste of my time"

Online El Barto

  • Rascal Atheistic Pig
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 25828
  • Bad Craziness
Re: Ukraine Scandal / Impeachment Investigation
« Reply #359 on: February 03, 2020, 03:06:40 PM »
If you look at someone for as long and as hard and as detailed as they have at trump over this three and a half years.....everyone will be found in breaking 'some' law out there.
No, not everyone.  Only people that do a lot of shady shit. 

Can't get caught if you aren't doing anything wrong.

True. But even in the wake of the Patriot Act and all the Freedoms we 'gave' up in pursuit and protection from the bad guys.....I'd be willing to be that every member on this forum is guilty of a Federal crime when it came down to it.

And, your kidding yourself if you don't think 99.9% of our elected officials aren't involved in ' a lot of shady shit' that would qualify as a crime.....including past presidents.
Dude, I committed a federal crime before breakfast this morning. That's not really the point, though. I'm not comparable to Trump, nor should I be held to the same standard (though the imbalance is starkly backward from how it should be). The point is whether people in similar situations would behave similarly. You hated Barack Obama. Do you honestly think for a second he would have unlawfully seized funds allocated by congress in an attempt to get dirt on Romney? Bush? Clinton? Bush? None of them would have because they all had a functional understanding of what their official power was. As I've said, this isn't about Trump being crooked or corrupt. This was about Trump having no clue that what he was doing was wrong because he simply doesn't understand his role as head of the executive branch. We kid around about Jack Nicholson and "you can't handle the truth." Donald Trump wants nothing more than to boast that he did it, he's proud of it, and he'd do it again, because in his world there was nothing wrong with it and other presidents were losers for not doing the same thing.

Again EB....I'm not arguing against what you're stating here. My only push back is I hated obama's presidency....I didn't/don't 'hate' the man. He's a decent human being. Which can't be said about trump. I totally agree that trumps lack of civility and basic understanding of what it means to be an American President makes one want to vomit.....and has repeatedly placed him in the cross hairs. Will not argue against that.

I will argue that the entire agenda from the Dems since post day 1 of trumps presidency has been to get him removed....as they've boasted about.....and that none of their actions or allegations since then have been any way connected to protecting america or in pursuit of truth and justice. They do not hold the necessary credibility to believe anything other than the entire attempt(s) to take out trump are nothing more than vengefully motivated. This is not to suggest that means the Repubs are by default 'credible'.....only that this narrative that somehow the Dems are trying to defend all that is right for america is a crock of crap.
Then don't listen to them. Think for yourself. Do you have any doubt Trump withheld allocated funding trying to get Ukraine to skew the election in his favor? And you didn't answer the question I asked. Do you think any of the presidents before him back to Nixon would have pulled such a thing? (Reagan might have, but it's by no means the sure thing that Trump is.) If my greatest enemy tells me that I'm on fire, I'm not going to ignore the smoke and the flames just because I don't trust his motivations.
« Last Edit: February 03, 2020, 03:17:57 PM by El Barto »
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Online El Barto

  • Rascal Atheistic Pig
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 25828
  • Bad Craziness
Re: Ukraine Scandal / Impeachment Investigation
« Reply #360 on: February 03, 2020, 03:14:55 PM »
If you look at someone for as long and as hard and as detailed as they have at trump over this three and a half years.....everyone will be found in breaking 'some' law out there.
No, not everyone.  Only people that do a lot of shady shit. 

Can't get caught if you aren't doing anything wrong.

True. But even in the wake of the Patriot Act and all the Freedoms we 'gave' up in pursuit and protection from the bad guys.....I'd be willing to be that every member on this forum is guilty of a Federal crime when it came down to it.

And, your kidding yourself if you don't think 99.9% of our elected officials aren't involved in ' a lot of shady shit' that would qualify as a crime.....including past presidents.
Dude, I committed a federal crime before breakfast this morning. That's not really the point, though. I'm not comparable to Trump, nor should I be held to the same standard (though the imbalance is starkly backward from how it should be). The point is whether people in similar situations would behave similarly. You hated Barack Obama. Do you honestly think for a second he would have unlawfully seized funds allocated by congress in an attempt to get dirt on Romney? Bush? Clinton? Bush? None of them would have because they all had a functional understanding of what their official power was. As I've said, this isn't about Trump being crooked or corrupt. This was about Trump having no clue that what he was doing was wrong because he simply doesn't understand his role as head of the executive branch. We kid around about Jack Nicholson and "you can't handle the truth." Donald Trump wants nothing more than to boast that he did it, he's proud of it, and he'd do it again, because in his world there was nothing wrong with it and other presidents were losers for not doing the same thing.

I want to be clear on one thing, though: I THINK Trump committed an impeachable offense. More than one, actually.   Fundamental to what I believe, though, is that what I think is immaterial.   What you think, what Gary thinks, what SCHIFF thinks, are all immaterial.  What can one PROVE in a suitable forum is all that matters.  I don't think that the Democrats (read: Schiff, and the House Managers) did that.  I just don't.  That's not to say that they COULDN'T have, they just didn't.  They took the easy road, they played on subjective emotions and not cold facts, and they betrayed their hands too often.   Schiff was playing checkers, and the Sekulow/Cipollone/Purpura/Philbin in particular were playing chess. They CERTAINLY did not prove obstruction of Congress; it's well-settled law that you cannot be held criminally liable for legally exercising your rights under the Constitution.  This isn't partisan subjectivity, it's a simple fact, like 2+2=4.  It's mechanical.
You've also said that you've seen enough circumstantial evidence to support conviction. However, it just doesn't matter. Whether or not the democrats proved their case means exactly as much as the democrats' motivations. Precisely jack shit. They could have presented audiotapes, videotapes, and an autographed first edition of Trump's latest scribe "Yes I Did It, And Here's How You Can Get Away With it Too," and we'd still have the same farcical shit-show we've got now. I understand that you're just trying to show how the republicans could legitimately come to the conclusion they inevitably will, but that's honestly missing the point. They system is irreparably broken, and the fact that we can drum up plausible deniability to grasp onto compounds the problem.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline lonestar

  • DTF Executive Chef
  • Official DTF Tour Guide
  • ****
  • Posts: 20187
  • Gender: Male
  • Silly Hatted Knife Chucker
    • Lady Obscure Music Magazine
Re: Ukraine Scandal / Impeachment Investigation
« Reply #361 on: February 03, 2020, 07:54:13 PM »
Hmm..trying to figure out what Federal crime I could've committed.. :lol

I don't have to wonder.... just gotta figure out which one I'll serve the most time for. Thank god for statute of limitations.

Online Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 28825
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: Ukraine Scandal / Impeachment Investigation
« Reply #362 on: February 04, 2020, 08:17:26 AM »
and that none of their actions or allegations since then have been any way connected to protecting america or in pursuit of truth and justice

This is exactly what Stadler said but in different words. "Democrats aren't interested in the truth or justice." And, respectfully, it's wrong.

You keep saying that; I've given hard proof why I say what I've said, but what's your proof?   How do you answer that if he was for "justice", he'd let the Courts reach their verdict?  The Federal courts are the very basis of justice in this country. How can you possibly be for justice if you ignore the courts entirely?

Huh. Seems to me like everyone in that chamber let the trial proceed. Seems to me if it wasn't fair, it would've been shut down at some point.

I don't understand that; what chamber?  You mean the House, where they voted ON A PARTY LINE to send the Articles to the Senate (said Articles that sat in Pelosi's briefcase for, what, a month)?   But you yelled at me when I said "Democrats" and out of respect for you I backed off and said "House Managers".   A party line vote is a party line vote; BOTH sides are making a statement there.    Or do you mean the Senate, where they haven't weighed in yet because they haven't had a chance to yet (tomorrow, I believe).  Surely when they do, we'll hear more about how the GOP are boot-licking, ass-kissing toadies, but "party line votes" take TWO parties to enact.   Maybe, just maybe, the narrative isn't accurate.  Maybe, just maybe, there's a Democrat or two in there (my vote is for the woman that said "I'm here to impeach that motherfucker!") that doesn't give a rat's ass about the Constitution, that doesn't give a rat's ass about "truth" or "justice" and is going to vote the way they WANT to regarding TRUMP, not the way they NEED to regarding the law and the Constitution.   

Online El Barto

  • Rascal Atheistic Pig
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 25828
  • Bad Craziness
Re: Ukraine Scandal / Impeachment Investigation
« Reply #363 on: February 04, 2020, 08:25:00 AM »
A party-line vote where 48 people state that the Earth is round and 52 people say it's pyramidal is also sending a statement.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Online Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 28825
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: Ukraine Scandal / Impeachment Investigation
« Reply #364 on: February 04, 2020, 08:37:10 AM »
A party-line vote where 48 people state that the Earth is round and 52 people say it's pyramidal is also sending a statement.

Respectfully, I'm not sure of your point.  I think I'm saying the same thing.   The Democrats in the House had numbers; that doesn't make them right.   As I apply your example to my argument to KTLX, 48 people stated the Earth was round/this was Constitutionally unsound, and 52 people said it was pyramidal/the case against Trump could proceed. 

If you think the opposite, that's fair, but I think it's only just that we consider that there might be some merit to the opposing view.  I would hardly view the relationship between the three branches of our government as the equivalent of seeing the Earth as a pyramid. 

Offline The Walrus

  • goo goo g'joob
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 17221
  • PSA: Stairway to Heaven is in 4/4
Re: Ukraine Scandal / Impeachment Investigation
« Reply #365 on: February 04, 2020, 09:11:08 AM »
and that none of their actions or allegations since then have been any way connected to protecting america or in pursuit of truth and justice

This is exactly what Stadler said but in different words. "Democrats aren't interested in the truth or justice." And, respectfully, it's wrong.

You keep saying that; I've given hard proof why I say what I've said, but what's your proof?   How do you answer that if he was for "justice", he'd let the Courts reach their verdict?  The Federal courts are the very basis of justice in this country. How can you possibly be for justice if you ignore the courts entirely?

Huh. Seems to me like everyone in that chamber let the trial proceed. Seems to me if it wasn't fair, it would've been shut down at some point.

I don't understand that; what chamber?  You mean the House, where they voted ON A PARTY LINE to send the Articles to the Senate (said Articles that sat in Pelosi's briefcase for, what, a month)?   But you yelled at me when I said "Democrats" and out of respect for you I backed off and said "House Managers".   A party line vote is a party line vote; BOTH sides are making a statement there.    Or do you mean the Senate, where they haven't weighed in yet because they haven't had a chance to yet (tomorrow, I believe).  Surely when they do, we'll hear more about how the GOP are boot-licking, ass-kissing toadies, but "party line votes" take TWO parties to enact.   Maybe, just maybe, the narrative isn't accurate.  Maybe, just maybe, there's a Democrat or two in there (my vote is for the woman that said "I'm here to impeach that motherfucker!") that doesn't give a rat's ass about the Constitution, that doesn't give a rat's ass about "truth" or "justice" and is going to vote the way they WANT to regarding TRUMP, not the way they NEED to regarding the law and the Constitution.

EDIT: I'm just gonna edit that out. Forget it, bud. At this point I'd rather hear you rant about Altressa Cox-Blackwell than moan about Brooke Baldwin and Adam Schiff one more time. :)

Look, Stads, I've conceded (probably elsewhere, if not here) that you're right on some things, but on others regarding this impeachment we are just seeing this through two very, very different lenses. Gonna have to agree to disagree here.
From a Mega Man Legends island jamming power metal to a Walrus listening to black metal, I like your story arc.
"I don't worry about nothing, no, 'cause worrying's a waste of my time"

Online Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 28825
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: Ukraine Scandal / Impeachment Investigation
« Reply #366 on: February 04, 2020, 01:42:40 PM »
And we'll do so with respect.  I get it, there are those that disagree.   I understand that.  I think I've been clear on the things that aren't really opinion, but many are.

Offline lonestar

  • DTF Executive Chef
  • Official DTF Tour Guide
  • ****
  • Posts: 20187
  • Gender: Male
  • Silly Hatted Knife Chucker
    • Lady Obscure Music Magazine
Re: Ukraine Scandal / Impeachment Investigation
« Reply #367 on: February 05, 2020, 01:43:54 PM »
Reports that Romney is gonna break rank and vote to convict Donnie.

Online El Barto

  • Rascal Atheistic Pig
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 25828
  • Bad Craziness
Re: Ukraine Scandal / Impeachment Investigation
« Reply #368 on: February 05, 2020, 02:19:13 PM »
The sad part is that Mitch McConnell won't even allow Manchin's proposal to censure Trump to get to the floor. Plenty of people have said that what he's done is inappropriate, but only in a format that won't earn Trump's wrath. Despite being crooked as all fuck, the Senate has an opportunity to let him off but scold him a little for what we all know was highly inappropriate. Instead they'll shield him like the cowards they are.

But hey, greatest nation on Earth, people!  :lol
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Online Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 28825
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: Ukraine Scandal / Impeachment Investigation
« Reply #369 on: February 05, 2020, 02:38:05 PM »
Reports that Romney is gonna break rank and vote to convict Donnie.

On Article I only; he voted not guilty on Article II (which involves the point of the legitimacy of Trump raising the issue in the courts). 

Offline Podaar

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 8705
  • Gender: Male
Re: Ukraine Scandal / Impeachment Investigation
« Reply #370 on: February 05, 2020, 05:04:12 PM »
The Utah State Legislature is in session, and is worse than our winter weather. HB0217 was introduced last week. It is a bill that would change our election laws so that the state legislature can recall US Senators. Coincidence or targeting Romney?
“I have always found it quaint, and rather touching, that there is a movement in the U.S. that thinks Americans are not yet selfish enough.” — Christopher Hitchens

Online Chino

  • Be excellent to each other.
  • DT.net Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 23538
  • Gender: Male
Re: Ukraine Scandal / Impeachment Investigation
« Reply #371 on: February 06, 2020, 07:00:58 AM »
Mitt could single-handedly remove Trump from office if he decided to run as an independent in November.

Offline lonestar

  • DTF Executive Chef
  • Official DTF Tour Guide
  • ****
  • Posts: 20187
  • Gender: Male
  • Silly Hatted Knife Chucker
    • Lady Obscure Music Magazine
Re: Ukraine Scandal / Impeachment Investigation
« Reply #372 on: February 06, 2020, 07:50:29 AM »
Mitt could single-handedly remove Trump from office if he decided to run as an independent in November.

Probably... He'd certainly divide the party, but I think one area where conservatives are better than liberals is voting red no matter what. I still think they'd rather have Donnie than any democrat.

Online hefdaddy42

  • Et in Arcadia Ego
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 43742
  • Gender: Male
  • Postwhore Emeritus
Re: Ukraine Scandal / Impeachment Investigation
« Reply #373 on: February 06, 2020, 07:55:48 AM »
The Utah State Legislature is in session, and is worse than our winter weather. HB0217 was introduced last week. It is a bill that would change our election laws so that the state legislature can recall US Senators. Coincidence or targeting Romney?
Surely such a bill would be unconstitutional? 
Hef is right on all things. Except for when I disagree with him. In which case he's probably still right.

Online Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 28825
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: Ukraine Scandal / Impeachment Investigation
« Reply #374 on: February 06, 2020, 08:08:55 AM »
Mitt could single-handedly remove Trump from office if he decided to run as an independent in November.

I go both ways on that.  I'd certainly vote for Romney (he's probably my "favorite" active politician in the game today), but does a "Bern-ster" vote for him?  Does an "Obama/Trump" voter - who by all accounts did so to move away from "change" from within the Establishment to change from outside the Establishment - vote for him?   Does the core Trump base vote for him?  I think the "middle", however you characterize it, is a plurality, but it's not a majority, and unless he gets every last vote in that group, that likely doesn't translate into a victory in November. 

And there's this:  there were a lot of people that didn't value the decorum/character of the candidates as high as they did the economic benefit of the candidates.  Six to nine million people didn't vote for Obama twice then Trump because they woke up one morning and decided they were "racist".  They decided that all the other benefits of a transcendent candidate like Obama didn't translate into Rust Belt jobs, and didn't put food on the table.  That is literally the one thing that Trump has going for him.  If someone who voted for Obama decided to vote for Trump, because the "nice guy" wasn't putting food on the table, what's different now after four years of solid results? 

Online Adami

  • Moderator of awesomeness
  • *
  • Posts: 32302
Re: Ukraine Scandal / Impeachment Investigation
« Reply #375 on: February 06, 2020, 08:13:23 AM »
I agree Romney couldn't win as an independent, but he COULD remove Trump by splitting the Republican vote enough to get a Democrat elected. That would do the job as well.

As much as we all love to rag on the Democrats for not making an amazing candidate, let's not forget that the current Republican party has basically said that Trump is the best candidate they have to offer.
fanticide.bandcamp.com

Offline The Walrus

  • goo goo g'joob
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 17221
  • PSA: Stairway to Heaven is in 4/4
Re: Ukraine Scandal / Impeachment Investigation
« Reply #376 on: February 06, 2020, 08:16:16 AM »
Not to mention how they all totally, completely denounced him and his wretched behavior, only to immediately fall back in line (even after his vicious personal attacks on all of them) and say what a great guy he'll be for the country. Didn't everybody make fun of John Kerry for a whole campaign cycle because of flip-flopping?
From a Mega Man Legends island jamming power metal to a Walrus listening to black metal, I like your story arc.
"I don't worry about nothing, no, 'cause worrying's a waste of my time"

Online El Barto

  • Rascal Atheistic Pig
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 25828
  • Bad Craziness
Re: Ukraine Scandal / Impeachment Investigation
« Reply #377 on: February 06, 2020, 08:23:34 AM »
Mitt could single-handedly remove Trump from office if he decided to run as an independent in November.

I go both ways on that.  I'd certainly vote for Romney (he's probably my "favorite" active politician in the game today), but does a "Bern-ster" vote for him?  Does an "Obama/Trump" voter - who by all accounts did so to move away from "change" from within the Establishment to change from outside the Establishment - vote for him?   Does the core Trump base vote for him?  I think the "middle", however you characterize it, is a plurality, but it's not a majority, and unless he gets every last vote in that group, that likely doesn't translate into a victory in November. 

And there's this:  there were a lot of people that didn't value the decorum/character of the candidates as high as they did the economic benefit of the candidates.  Six to nine million people didn't vote for Obama twice then Trump because they woke up one morning and decided they were "racist".  They decided that all the other benefits of a transcendent candidate like Obama didn't translate into Rust Belt jobs, and didn't put food on the table.  That is literally the one thing that Trump has going for him.  If someone who voted for Obama decided to vote for Trump, because the "nice guy" wasn't putting food on the table, what's different now after four years of solid results? 
Trump's already lost the  "Obama/Trump" voters. While they no doubt wanted change, they also wanted sanity. As for the people who vote based on economics, some are better off and others aren't. A whole lot of the people who voted for Trump were farmers and industrial workers who were promised massive benefits. Farms are bankrupting at record rates, and the industrial sector hasn't boomed like he promised. He won some coal miners and some steel workers, but he's lost a lot of them too. I'd say he's probably lost more rust belt voters than he's gained. There are also huge blocks of people whose taxes went way up after he cut them. We'll be hearing from them in the coming weeks. Myself, I'm lucky. My taxes merely stayed the same after he cut them.  :lol And we're seeing evidence that it didn't have the greater effect that it was supposed to. ATT has cut 37k jobs since the tax cut, despite lobbying so heavily for it on the basis that it would allow them to create tens of thousands of new jobs. Gosh, who could have imagined that?
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline Dave_Manchester

  • Posts: 1592
Re: Ukraine Scandal / Impeachment Investigation
« Reply #378 on: February 06, 2020, 09:11:26 AM »
Couple of you guys have already mentioned this but I think it would be risky for Mitt to run as an Independent. While I agree a Romney run would potentially damage Trump's chances of winning, we always need to remember the astonishing power of Trump's political machine (aka The Artist Formerly Known As The Republican Party). Romney himself certainly wouldn't win, and so the 'hope' (for me anyway) is that it'd stack the odds in the favour of whoever the Dem nominee is. We saw a similar thing in 2016. Hillary's list of people she blames for her 2016 loss is the length of a phone book and if we flick to the 'S' section we find Jill Stein ("a Russian asset" as she called her), whom she blamed for taking away much-needed 'women' votes. Entitlement and condescension aside (I'm pretty sure women don't just vote based on gender), she's not wrong about the effect it had on her chances, and so it's possible the same would be true for Trump. 

But, I really do think Trump is a whole different scenario. Unlike Hillary, he has totally subjugated his party and made it his own. He and his minions have already begun the Twitter attacks on Romney, and if he runs, Trump will only ramp them up and drill into voters' minds that a vote for Mitt is effectively a vote for the gun-takin' baby-killin' God-hatin' commie Dems. Trump is just so far ahead of anyone else in his ability to destroy people, because like I said last night, he is allowed to use tactics that others aren't (remember the days when "don't lower yourselves to the level of the President" wasn't the national motto?).

That said, I hope he runs if only to send a message that the 2-party system seems to be stagnating. The Democrats do everything they can to suppress Bernie Sanders, and now we have Romney (and Ryan and Hurd and Flake and...) being squeezed out of the GOP. Who would have thought 10 years ago that Mitt Romney would be considered a "traitor" (Trump Jr's word for him last night) to the Republican Party, and that Donald Trump is its new figurehead?



Slight tangent but I was amazed last night to read that the population of the USA in 1960 was 180 million. Today it is 327 million. An 80% population increase in just 60 years. For comparison I looked up the increases for 5 major European countries (UK, Germany, France, Italy and Spain), and only Germany came remotely close, but even that was only a 45% increase (and accordingly, Germany frequently has coalition governments at the state level).

The reason I'm saying this is there's an argument to be made that the current 2-party system doesn't work all that well for such a ballooning population, at least as regards the airing of fresh political ideas. Lindsey Graham wrote a warning to the Republican Party in May 2016: "If we hand Trump the nomination, we will be destroyed, and we will deserve it". The GOP has in some way been destroyed (thanks in part to spineless creatures like Graham), it's now Donald Trump's party, and intelligent conservative thinkers are being pushed out. On the Dem side, the DNC consistently does everything it can to hamstring Bernie Sanders, and to a lesser extent Elizabeth Warren.  So just as I've wished for 4 years now that true leftists would break away from the Democrats and form their own party, it may also be time for conservatives to go their own way from the GOP. Since Trump is almost certainly winning in 2020, they can take 4 years to get themselves organised and offer their own ideas to the populace in 2024. I dunno, just something to think about.
"As democracy is perfected, the office of President represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their hearts' desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron" - H.L.Mencken, 26th July 1920.

"China has total respect for Donald Trump and for Donald Trump's very very large brain" - American President Donald Trump, 26th September 2018.

Online Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 28825
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: Ukraine Scandal / Impeachment Investigation
« Reply #379 on: February 06, 2020, 10:49:48 AM »
I agree Romney couldn't win as an independent, but he COULD remove Trump by splitting the Republican vote enough to get a Democrat elected. That would do the job as well.

As much as we all love to rag on the Democrats for not making an amazing candidate, let's not forget that the current Republican party has basically said that Trump is the best candidate they have to offer.

Not for me it wouldn't.  That I like Mitt and dislike Trump doesn't mean that I think any of the Democrats are a move in the right direction.  In this partisan environment, "any Democrat" is likely to be ultimately as harmful as four more years of Trump.   Yes, I really believe that.

The one exception might be Buttigieg. 

Online Adami

  • Moderator of awesomeness
  • *
  • Posts: 32302
Re: Ukraine Scandal / Impeachment Investigation
« Reply #380 on: February 06, 2020, 10:52:05 AM »
I agree Romney couldn't win as an independent, but he COULD remove Trump by splitting the Republican vote enough to get a Democrat elected. That would do the job as well.

As much as we all love to rag on the Democrats for not making an amazing candidate, let's not forget that the current Republican party has basically said that Trump is the best candidate they have to offer.

Not for me it wouldn't.  That I like Mitt and dislike Trump doesn't mean that I think any of the Democrats are a move in the right direction.  In this partisan environment, "any Democrat" is likely to be ultimately as harmful as four more years of Trump.   Yes, I really believe that.

The one exception might be Buttigieg.

I wasn't making a judgment call in my first statement. Chino said Romney could unseat Trump. You said no, given an interpretation of that statement. I just offered a different scenario where Romney running as an independent could result in the loss of Trump. Not that it was a good or bad thing.
fanticide.bandcamp.com

Online Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 28825
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: Ukraine Scandal / Impeachment Investigation
« Reply #381 on: February 06, 2020, 10:54:36 AM »
I don't know if this is the right place or not, but I have Trump's speaking engagement on now, and it's fascinating, and not in a good way.   It's like an extended Academy Awards speech, with no notes.

I'm waiting for the first comment that will be called "an admission of guilt".   It won't be long the way this is going. 

Online Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 28825
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: Ukraine Scandal / Impeachment Investigation
« Reply #382 on: February 06, 2020, 10:55:26 AM »
I agree Romney couldn't win as an independent, but he COULD remove Trump by splitting the Republican vote enough to get a Democrat elected. That would do the job as well.

As much as we all love to rag on the Democrats for not making an amazing candidate, let's not forget that the current Republican party has basically said that Trump is the best candidate they have to offer.

Not for me it wouldn't.  That I like Mitt and dislike Trump doesn't mean that I think any of the Democrats are a move in the right direction.  In this partisan environment, "any Democrat" is likely to be ultimately as harmful as four more years of Trump.   Yes, I really believe that.

The one exception might be Buttigieg.

I wasn't making a judgment call in my first statement. Chino said Romney could unseat Trump. You said no, given an interpretation of that statement. I just offered a different scenario where Romney running as an independent could result in the loss of Trump. Not that it was a good or bad thing.
I'm sorry (truly).  I read "do the job" as advocacy. Sorry about that if that wasn't your intent.

Online Adami

  • Moderator of awesomeness
  • *
  • Posts: 32302
Re: Ukraine Scandal / Impeachment Investigation
« Reply #383 on: February 06, 2020, 10:56:24 AM »
I don't know if this is the right place or not, but I have Trump's speaking engagement on now, and it's fascinating, and not in a good way.   It's like an extended Academy Awards speech, with no notes.

I'm waiting for the first comment that will be called "an admission of guilt".   It won't be long the way this is going.

You know, if the Republicans were smart, they'd expand on your comparison and start using that music they use at the Oscars to shut the person up.

"So I was like...China....we have to do something about North Korea after I gave them all this money for.."
-Closing music plays and trump's mic is shut off-
fanticide.bandcamp.com

Online Adami

  • Moderator of awesomeness
  • *
  • Posts: 32302
Re: Ukraine Scandal / Impeachment Investigation
« Reply #384 on: February 06, 2020, 10:57:51 AM »
I agree Romney couldn't win as an independent, but he COULD remove Trump by splitting the Republican vote enough to get a Democrat elected. That would do the job as well.

As much as we all love to rag on the Democrats for not making an amazing candidate, let's not forget that the current Republican party has basically said that Trump is the best candidate they have to offer.

Not for me it wouldn't.  That I like Mitt and dislike Trump doesn't mean that I think any of the Democrats are a move in the right direction.  In this partisan environment, "any Democrat" is likely to be ultimately as harmful as four more years of Trump.   Yes, I really believe that.

The one exception might be Buttigieg.

I wasn't making a judgment call in my first statement. Chino said Romney could unseat Trump. You said no, given an interpretation of that statement. I just offered a different scenario where Romney running as an independent could result in the loss of Trump. Not that it was a good or bad thing.
I'm sorry (truly).  I read "do the job" as advocacy. Sorry about that if that wasn't your intent.

Oh no. I'm WAY more concerned about the Israeli election than American. I am not nearly as filled with panic as most leftists (as I am one) because I am just not as connected to the system. I know we'll survive 4 more years of Trump. Part of my job is preparing people to handle the pain they can't avoid, so I've gotten used to it.
fanticide.bandcamp.com