|
Metoo
Stranger


Registered: 10/13/18
Posts: 1,524
Last seen: 2 hours, 43 minutes
|
The abuse of power which led to impeachment 2
#26392456 - 12/20/19 01:20 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
An angle not covered by the mainstream media:
So the Dems won the House and ended up with considerable political powers. But it cuts both ways - these powers are meant to be used only as prescribed in the Constitution.
It is clear that the Founding Fathers envisaged impeachment as a process applicable in transgressions so compelling that addressing them attracts bipartisan support. Despite no bipartisan support for the current motion the Dems pressed on and impeached Trump.
Now a question - was this not abuse of powers vested in the Dems by the voters?
Edited by Metoo (12/20/19 02:00 PM)
|
Magickalfungi72
Master Wizard

Registered: 12/08/19
Posts: 30
Last seen: 4 years, 1 month
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Metoo]
#26392484 - 12/20/19 01:37 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Of course it was. The question is not was there an abuse of power, but will republicans ever go on the offemsive. Probably not since it’s top leaders are rino Zog supporters
|
JohnRainy
Stranger

Registered: 07/09/19
Posts: 1,244
Last seen: 3 years, 11 months
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Metoo] 2
#26392627 - 12/20/19 03:12 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Can you give a link describing this bipartisan requirement?
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,049
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 4 hours, 7 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: JohnRainy] 1
#26392665 - 12/20/19 03:43 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
The founders didn’t even believe there would be parties in American politics. OPs analysis is absurd.
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
JohnRainy
Stranger

Registered: 07/09/19
Posts: 1,244
Last seen: 3 years, 11 months
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: koods]
#26392720 - 12/20/19 04:16 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Im sure OP didn't think of it himself. The Trump posse is prone to saying any damn crazy thing. His lawyers argued in court he could murder people in broad daylight and the state would legally be powerless.
Now they are thinking of saying he's not impeached because the senate hasn't officially received the articles. Perhaps next they will set a retroactive deadline that has already passed and say the impeachment is cancelled.
Then Trump could go around saying how he was never impeached and brag how he defeated his enemies and there will be memes from action movies online and FOXNEWS will call him a genius and whatever else.
As the courts get stacked more and more, this shit becomes more and more entrench-able.
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,049
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 4 hours, 7 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: JohnRainy]
#26392779 - 12/20/19 04:53 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
And it was bipartisan. One independent voted to impeach.
This thread is terrible. OP should delete
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
Edited by koods (12/20/19 04:54 PM)
|
setarcoS
Future gypsum king


Registered: 09/23/19
Posts: 53
Last seen: 4 years, 7 days
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: koods]
#26392829 - 12/20/19 05:32 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Democrats are even defecting to the Republicans now due to the circus their party has become. Of course they are totally abusing their powers by blocking Republicans from speaking, hearings and seeing evidence (any more "unnamed sources" we should be hearing from?)
Just think about all the time and money wasted on illegal presidential harassment by the do-nothing Democrats. Thankfully the satanic left will lose bigly again come the next election. SAD!
-------------------- All comments are for entertainment or legal research purposes only "Nothing can be done, except bit by bit"
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,049
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 4 hours, 7 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: setarcoS]
#26392837 - 12/20/19 05:39 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
One Democrat left the party. One Republican left the party.
Quote:
illegal presidential harassment by the do-nothing Democrats.
Is that you Donald?
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
JohnRainy
Stranger

Registered: 07/09/19
Posts: 1,244
Last seen: 3 years, 11 months
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: setarcoS]
#26392841 - 12/20/19 05:43 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
T'was the White House which ignored subpoenas and refused to participate.
Do you remember?
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,049
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 4 hours, 7 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: JohnRainy]
#26392856 - 12/20/19 05:51 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
They’re upset because the democrats wouldn’t allow them to use the impeachment process to investigate Joe Biden.
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
JohnRainy
Stranger

Registered: 07/09/19
Posts: 1,244
Last seen: 3 years, 11 months
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: koods]
#26392871 - 12/20/19 06:01 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
|
Metoo
Stranger


Registered: 10/13/18
Posts: 1,524
Last seen: 2 hours, 43 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: JohnRainy]
#26392885 - 12/20/19 06:09 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
JohnRainy said: Can you give a link describing this bipartisan requirement?
Here is a link explaining why, from the constitutional angle, impeachment was not supposed to be the vehicle of partisan politics.
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/fact-constitution-dictates-impeachment-must-not-be-partisan-83076
With this established, what do you think - did Dems abuse power or not?
|
ballsalsa
Universally Loathed and Reviled



Registered: 03/11/15
Posts: 20,837
Loc: Foreign Lands
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Metoo]
#26392896 - 12/20/19 06:15 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Mis, prefix- wrong, bad, or erroneous; wrongly, badly, or erroneously (misunderstanding; misfortune; misspelling; mistreat;)
Demeanor, noun- conduct; behavior; deportment.
--------------------
Like cannabis topics? Read my cannabis blog here
|
Metoo
Stranger


Registered: 10/13/18
Posts: 1,524
Last seen: 2 hours, 43 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: JohnRainy]
#26392898 - 12/20/19 06:16 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
JohnRainy said: Im sure OP didn't think of it himself...
Thank you for your comments on a wide range of related topics. But back to the OP - do you think the Dems have committed abuse of power? Some reasoning in support of your view will be appreciated.
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,049
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 4 hours, 7 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Metoo]
#26392943 - 12/20/19 06:49 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Metoo said:
Quote:
JohnRainy said: Can you give a link describing this bipartisan requirement?
Here is a link explaining why, from the constitutional angle, impeachment was not supposed to be the vehicle of partisan politics.
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/fact-constitution-dictates-impeachment-must-not-be-partisan-83076
With this established, what do you think - did Dems abuse power or not?
It isn’t a vehicle of partisan politics. Trump abused his office by leveraging US taxpayer money for his own personal gain.
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,049
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 4 hours, 7 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: ballsalsa] 1
#26392952 - 12/20/19 06:54 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
ballsalsa said: Mis, prefix- wrong, bad, or erroneous; wrongly, badly, or erroneously (misunderstanding; misfortune; misspelling; mistreat;)
Demeanor, noun- conduct; behavior; deportment.
For context:
Quote:
The President, Vice President and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
Metoo
Stranger


Registered: 10/13/18
Posts: 1,524
Last seen: 2 hours, 43 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: koods]
#26393007 - 12/20/19 07:26 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
koods said: It isn’t a vehicle of partisan politics. Trump abused his office by leveraging US taxpayer money for his own personal gain.
With (parts of) only one political party supporting it the impeachment was the way Dems were trying to have a go at Trump - in a completely partisan fashion. The impeachment was intended as a bipartisan vehicle to get rid of a rogue president, not as just another weapon is partisan squabbles. Dems have used impeachment in violation of the constitutional intent which is abuse of power.
|
JohnRainy
Stranger

Registered: 07/09/19
Posts: 1,244
Last seen: 3 years, 11 months
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Metoo] 1
#26393010 - 12/20/19 07:27 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
I read it.
And I swear to god I hate seeing that fucking ad of the cartoon lady with nail fungus all over the internet.
I wish that would go away.
But in that article I see no argument saying the impeachment must enjoy bi-partisan support. The conclusion of the article reads
Thus, out of respect for the democratic process, a president cannot be impeached to promote Congress’ political agenda. Nor should lawmakers avoid impeachment because of perceived political cost.
Rather, given its remarkable gravity, a president should be impeached for conduct that – if committed by any president regardless of political or party affiliations – so taints or corrupts the presidency, he or she must be removed to preserve the integrity of American government.
Thus, the standard for impeachment must be politically neutral. Otherwise, impeachment becomes an illegitimate device to overturn elections.
The Congress established through testimony that the president personally tried to suspend finalized United States policy for the benefit of his own whims. The Democrats characterized it as being an attempt to tar Biden and therefore influence the election.
I don't know if that intent can be proven but the act of contradicting United States policy in a rogue fashion is enough for me. That policy of the military capital going to Ukraine belonged to the United States, Trump took it as his own to do with as he damn well pleased. It was not his to do that with.
He clearly put his whims before his country.
Ill quote the article's conclusion again
Quote:
Rather, given its remarkable gravity, a president should be impeached for conduct that – if committed by any president regardless of political or party affiliations – so taints or corrupts the presidency, he or she must be removed to preserve the integrity of American government.
The president certainly sullied the integrity of the American government with his actions. Now foreign allies of USA can not depend on the word of it's government. You might get one story one day then some guy who the president doesn't know if he's his lawyer calls you up and it's all different now.
For the good of the country that can't go unanswered.
The biggest argument for bi-partisan support in that article comes from Nancy Pelosi herself.
Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi told The Washington Post in March that “impeachment is so divisive to the country that unless there’s something so compelling and overwhelming and bipartisan, I don’t think we should go down that path.”
This article pre-dates the recent impeachment campaign, and Pelosi was responding there to calls for impeachment that were happening then. I think people felt Trump was violating the emoluments clause, and obstructed justice.
But her statement is not a law, or anything official. And Im not surprised some corrupt old lady such as herself ended up sounding like a hypocrite.
The article's headline "FACT: The Constitution Dictates that Impeachment Must Not Be Partisan", after reading the article, I think 'partisan' in this context means 'for the sole benefit of a political party'.
Edited by JohnRainy (12/20/19 07:46 PM)
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,049
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 4 hours, 7 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: JohnRainy]
#26393034 - 12/20/19 07:37 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Impeachment doesn’t change the party that controls the White House. There is no actual change in politcal power involved.
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,049
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 4 hours, 7 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: koods] 1
#26393038 - 12/20/19 07:39 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
If the founders truly believed that impeachment by the house should be bipartisan then they wouldn’t have made it possible by a simple majority of members.
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
Metoo
Stranger


Registered: 10/13/18
Posts: 1,524
Last seen: 2 hours, 43 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: JohnRainy] 1
#26393066 - 12/20/19 08:04 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
JohnRainy said: I read it...
The way you view Trump's conduct is reasonable and I take no issue with your motivation or logic. I personally do not share your conclusions and, more importantly, neither do the elected representatives of one of the two major political parties. Which is what makes the analysis of what is in the transcript off the topic of this thread.
Since the Dems control the House and GOP contributed no votes the impeachment was exactly the effort to "promote Congress’ political agenda" - the agenda being trying to get rid of Trump. Rather than being "politically neutral" the process was dripping in partisanship. I am not saying that the Dems reading of the events is wrong but merely that impeachment was not meant to be a vehicle of partisan politics and if the floor debate and vote count were not partisan I do not know what is.
Tulsi took a principled stand - Trump messed up but, in absence of the GOP support, the impeachment effort is unconstitutional.
|
Metoo
Stranger


Registered: 10/13/18
Posts: 1,524
Last seen: 2 hours, 43 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Metoo]
#26393091 - 12/20/19 08:20 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Another opinion piece which outlines the same argument using different phrasing:
https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/473849-two-house-articles-of-impeachment-fail-to-meet-constitutional-standards
Both (articles of impeachment) raise the “greatest danger,” in the words of Alexander Hamilton, that the decision to impeach will be based on the “comparative strength of parties” rather than on “innocence or guilt"
Given the partisan nature of the floor debate and subsequent vote the outcome indeed simply reflected the “comparative strength of parties”
Edited by Metoo (12/20/19 08:33 PM)
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,049
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 4 hours, 7 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Metoo] 2
#26393094 - 12/20/19 08:23 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Lol Alan Dershowitz. Child rapist defending another child rapist. Maybe we should ask Prince Andrew what he thinks.
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
Edited by koods (12/20/19 08:23 PM)
|
JohnRainy
Stranger

Registered: 07/09/19
Posts: 1,244
Last seen: 3 years, 11 months
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: koods]
#26393216 - 12/20/19 09:52 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
I'm afraid that the nature of the system renders this sort of outcome being likely to occur at some point.
It's a partisan system.
There was one former republican who would certainly have voted with the democrats had he not renounced his party affiliation and became an independent. It's not much but there is that.
"in the words of Alexander Hamilton, that the decision to impeach will be based on the “comparative strength of parties” rather than on “innocence or guilt"
I'd like to see what he would have to say about this situation.
Throughout this impeachment the Republicans have been trying everything from crashing meetings to ignoring subpoenas to comparing Trump to Jesus Christ in just a ridiculous display of blind partisanship.
The Dems aren't non-partisan either, but what they said made sense at least. They were able to establish facts that illustrated an abuse of power.
That quote from Alexander Hamilton is a vaguely defined concern, and in order to invalidate this impeachment we are going to need something more concrete than that. A statement from hundreds of years ago addressing a hypothetical situation is just that.
As for Alan Dershowich, he has quite a long and sordid history of lending approval to despicable things. I don't really value his opinion or anything. He doesn't even make the case here that it's purely partisanship that playing out. He just kind of implies it, because there is no evidence presented to indicate that it was partisan. He does not address the facts of the case.
And neither do any of these people who oppose the impeachment. They will not address the revelations of the testimony.
Going the way it did, with no republicans voting to impeach could just as easily illustrate the partisanship Alexander Hamilton was concerned with, and if anything the display put on by the republicans indicates that.
Edited by JohnRainy (12/20/19 10:15 PM)
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,049
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 4 hours, 7 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: JohnRainy]
#26393239 - 12/20/19 10:09 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
The independent did vote to impeach so it was bi-partisan. Maybe op will demand it was supposed to be tri-partisan now.
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
Metoo
Stranger


Registered: 10/13/18
Posts: 1,524
Last seen: 2 hours, 43 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: JohnRainy]
#26393250 - 12/20/19 10:25 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
JohnRainy said: I'm afraid that the nature of the system renders this sort of outcome being likely to occur at some point.
Agreed but we can still either accept it as a new normal or not. To me constitutional law is more like ethics it sets the high level guidelines but does not judge any particular acts or situations. If you think that one independent voting for impeachment makes the process non partisan good luck to you.
Your personal assessment of Trump's and GOP actions is interesting but not that relevant. In my world the nature of the House consensus was clearly partisan and impeachment was specifically not meant to be an exercise of partisan power so that is where it ends.
Of course if you believe that the Constitution is outdated then all of this does not matter - to you. All I am saying is that the whole process was completely partisan and as such violated the Constitutional parameters for impeaching a sitting president.
Edited by Metoo (12/20/19 10:44 PM)
|
Metoo
Stranger


Registered: 10/13/18
Posts: 1,524
Last seen: 2 hours, 43 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: koods]
#26393257 - 12/20/19 10:32 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
koods said: The independent did vote to impeach so it was bi-partisan. Maybe op will demand it was supposed to be tri-partisan now.
Bi-partisan: "involving the agreement or cooperation of two political parties that usually oppose each other's policies."
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,049
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 4 hours, 7 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Metoo] 1
#26393307 - 12/20/19 11:46 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
If they wanted such a high standard, they would have made impeachment subject to a supermajority, like they prescribed for the senate. By making it a simple majority, they put up no barrier to purely partisan impeachments. That’s why the senate has more rigorous requirements.
I was reading the federalist papers and it’s interesting that the reason Hamilton supported holding the trial in the senate was because senators were not beholden to the electorate. We changed from appointing senators to electing them but never understood how that changed the nature of the senate as an impartial body.
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
JohnRainy
Stranger

Registered: 07/09/19
Posts: 1,244
Last seen: 3 years, 11 months
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Metoo]
#26393335 - 12/21/19 12:11 AM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
There is nothing to directly indicate that this was driven primarily by partisanship. Even if a handful of republicans would have gone along with it neither is that an indication that it wasn't driven primarily by partisanship.
Its a very unscientific accounting of phenomenon to characterize them strictly according to your fears.
The fact that 0 republicans voted in favour of impeachment is just a one dimensional fact with no depth to it to indicate anything one way or the other.
Trump sympathizers are just throwing stuff out there now, FOXNEWS had Laura Ingram mischaracterize Noah Feldman as 'the democrat's lawyer', with the words "America's first fake impeachment" in the corner of the screen, and say "One could make the argument that Trump wasn't really impeached. (pause) At least not yet" then mischaracterize the Dems follow up to the impeachment vote while selectively quoting Mr. Feldman to make it sound like a procedural violation had occurred because the articles have not been sent to the senate yet.

You can read what Noah Feldman actually said here.
He was making the point that Pelosi's attempts to influence the senate trial are pointless because the senate can do whatever it wants here. And if she never sends them over then I guess he's never impeached. But there is nothing to indicate she won't do that eventually.
It's just more crap. More injecting of confusion into the public narrative. Like how GWB won Florida, or global warming is a hoax. No addressing of the question.
The votes never were counted in Florida, and the fact that CO2 absorbs infrared light that otherwise would head out to space, but rather is re-emitted sometimes to earth is never acknowledged. And Trump's activities as revealed in the testimony are likewise not acknowledged.
You're free to judge the world according to your wit, as am I.
|
Metoo
Stranger


Registered: 10/13/18
Posts: 1,524
Last seen: 2 hours, 43 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: JohnRainy] 1
#26393354 - 12/21/19 12:34 AM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
JohnRainy said: There is nothing to directly indicate that this was driven primarily by partisanship. Even if a handful of republicans would have gone along with it neither is that an indication that it wasn't driven primarily by partisanship. (...) You're free to judge the world according to your wit, as am I.
We are indeed free to judge what we see as we please. Just for the benefit of my education: if during the Senate trial all Democrats vote for and all Republicans against deposing Trump you also will not view it as partisan?
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,495
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Metoo]
#26393365 - 12/21/19 01:02 AM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Maybe belief in the grounds for impeachment was bipartisan, but resistance to impeachment was partisan.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
JohnRainy
Stranger

Registered: 07/09/19
Posts: 1,244
Last seen: 3 years, 11 months
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Metoo]
#26393366 - 12/21/19 01:07 AM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Not partisan in the sense that there is nothing more to it than Trump isn't a Democrat so therefore they impeached him.
If the Repub's senate just rubber stamp his acquittal with no witnesses, and no proving his actions were not an abuse of power, and no nothing, Id's use the word corrupt to describe it.
The Dems established a case.
It would be nice if the republicans could do the same.
Edited by JohnRainy (12/21/19 01:14 AM)
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,049
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 4 hours, 7 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: JohnRainy]
#26393371 - 12/21/19 01:13 AM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
You know what they say “the House of Representatives could impeach a ham sandwich”
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
Metoo
Stranger


Registered: 10/13/18
Posts: 1,524
Last seen: 2 hours, 43 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: JohnRainy] 1
#26393382 - 12/21/19 01:25 AM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
JohnRainy said: Not partisan in the sense that there is nothing more to it than Trump isn't a Democrat so therefore they impeached him.
If the Repub's senate just rubber stamp his acquittal with no witnesses, and no proving his actions were not an abuse of power, and no nothing, Id's use the word corrupt to describe it.
The Dems established a case.
It would be nice if the republicans could do the same.
Got it - so if the Senate vote splits along party lines it will not be partisan because who knows why all Democrats happened to vote yes and all Republicans no. If all Republicans vote against the motion without first meeting your standard of evidence they will be corrupt but still not partisan.
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,049
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 4 hours, 7 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Metoo]
#26393383 - 12/21/19 01:29 AM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
It doesn’t matter. The house has sole power of impeachment. Their actions are not subject to judicial review. Impeachment is whatever the house says it is.
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
Metoo
Stranger


Registered: 10/13/18
Posts: 1,524
Last seen: 2 hours, 43 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: koods]
#26393390 - 12/21/19 01:33 AM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
koods said: It doesn’t matter. The house has sole power of impeachment. Their actions are not subject to judicial review. Impeachment is whatever the house says it is.
No
If the House votes to impeach President Trump on grounds not authorized by the Constitution, its action, in the words of Hamilton, is void.
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,049
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 4 hours, 7 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Metoo] 3
#26393402 - 12/21/19 01:48 AM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Says who
Hamilton is dead and he forgot to put that in the constitution
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
JohnRainy
Stranger

Registered: 07/09/19
Posts: 1,244
Last seen: 3 years, 11 months
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: koods]
#26393406 - 12/21/19 01:51 AM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Characterizing a partisan outcome that a partisan system produced as being 'partisan' is redundant.
It's a partisan system. And the republican's votes in the house on this impeachment can be characterized in the same way. Partisan. They are both apparently behaving in a partisan fashion. Any misgivings about the partisan quality of this outcome cuts each way equally, therefore it is pointless.
Id like to see the senate make their case is all. Because the congress did actually do that.
He is accused by Congress of abuse of power. Witnesses testimony and expert opinion back this up. It's a case.
The senate can address this, or the majority can turn it into something where they say he's just like Jesus or whatever and then maybe Trump will start complaining that appliances in this day and age don't use enough water. Or whatever song and dance they pull to not address the question.
I want to know how a president can take his country's policy hostage for his own little games. I'd like them to explain that to me.
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,049
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 4 hours, 7 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: JohnRainy]
#26393414 - 12/21/19 02:09 AM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
New FOIA document dump from pentagon shows the White House put Ukraine aid on hold one hour after Trump’s perfect July 25 call with zelensky 🤔
https://publicintegrity.org/national-security/digging-ukrainedocs-omb-foia/this
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
Tantrika
Miss Ann Thrope




Registered: 03/26/12
Posts: 17,138
Loc: Lashed to the pyre
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Metoo] 1
#26393417 - 12/21/19 02:19 AM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Metoo said: An angle not covered by the mainstream media:
So the Dems won the House and ended up with considerable political powers. But it cuts both ways - these powers are meant to be used only as prescribed in the Constitution.
It is clear that the Founding Fathers envisaged impeachment as a process applicable in transgressions so compelling that addressing them attracts bipartisan support. Despite no bipartisan support for the current motion the Dems pressed on and impeached Trump.
Now a question - was this not abuse of powers vested in the Dems by the voters?
Was the Clinton impeachment bipartisan?
is the impeachment process for Trump bipartisan, or is the support for him that sought to obstruct impeachment bipartisan? Would there have been a threshhold for Trump's activities that qualified him for impeachment that the Republicans would have actually sided with, or is Impeachment going to be bipartisan as long as the system is two-party?
|
Metoo
Stranger


Registered: 10/13/18
Posts: 1,524
Last seen: 2 hours, 43 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: JohnRainy] 1
#26393421 - 12/21/19 02:27 AM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
JohnRainy said: Characterizing a partisan outcome that a partisan system produced as being 'partisan' is redundant.
It's a partisan system. And the republican's votes in the house on this impeachment can be characterized in the same way. Partisan. They are both apparently behaving in a partisan fashion. Any misgivings about the partisan quality of this outcome cuts each way equally, therefore it is pointless
You are losing me. Let me go back over the ground already covered in case I am missing something. I think we first agreed that the Constitution describes impeachment as a non partisan measure?
Then you explained that, in your view, the Dems impeachment motion in the House was not partisan. Although the vote went largely along party lines, to attribute a partisanship motivation to the Democrats initiating it would be one dimensional and have no depth.
Then, presented with a hypothetical scenario of a similar voting outcome in the Senate, you claimed that it would still not be partisan but if the Republicans did not manage to convert you to their viewpoint they would be corrupt. However, when pressed further, you are now admitting that all outcomes produced by the current political system are partisan. Where am I misinterpreting your views?
Sorry if it looks like I am ignoring your comments on the merits of the impeachment case. I am just trying to keep this thread focused on whether the impeachment process was the right vehicle to use in this case, and not on what Trump did or did not do.
|
Metoo
Stranger


Registered: 10/13/18
Posts: 1,524
Last seen: 2 hours, 43 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Tantrika] 1
#26393427 - 12/21/19 02:45 AM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Tantrika said:
Was the Clinton impeachment bipartisan?
is the impeachment process for Trump bipartisan, or is the support for him that sought to obstruct impeachment bipartisan? Would there have been a threshhold for Trump's activities that qualified him for impeachment that the Republicans would have actually sided with, or is Impeachment going to be bipartisan as long as the system is two-party?
There were five Democrats voting to impeach Clinton so in that sense it was bipartisan.
The motion to impeach Trump was partisan because no Republican representatives supported it. His defence was less partisan because a handful of Dems crossed the floor. Impeachment was devised as a bipartisan measure to prevent this exact scenario i.e. one party controlling the House impeaching a president without any support from the opposition representatives.
There is no threshold of guilt above which a partisan impeachment becomes constitutional. My speculation is that the Fathers assumed that an obvious act of high crimes or misdemeanor will always generate bipartisan pushback. It clearly did not happen in this case.
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,049
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 4 hours, 7 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Metoo] 4
#26393428 - 12/21/19 02:47 AM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
This is completely made up. Trump has been impeached. Deal with it.
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
JohnRainy
Stranger

Registered: 07/09/19
Posts: 1,244
Last seen: 3 years, 11 months
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Metoo]
#26393433 - 12/21/19 03:00 AM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
The partisanship quality is redundant to take note of within a partisan system. It's often going to be apparently partisan.
Of course the republican congress voted unanimously. They already know he's getting acquitted by the senate, and they know he'll spend the rest of his life saying horrible things about them, especially anytime they are trying to get elected.
That's your partisan influence here.
The impeachment was based on what came out of a whistleblower's complaint, not on the fact that Trump is not a Democrat. If the democrats case was 'trump is not a republican therefore he must be impeached', that would not be constitutionally valid. Neither would trying to remove him because it would facilitate their agenda.
The constitution does not say all parties have to agree or even that there must be support from another party.
Alexander Hamilton said impeachable offences “are those offenses which proceed from the misconduct of public men … from the abuse or violation of some public trust.”
I think that's validating to this impeachment.
Edited by JohnRainy (12/21/19 03:08 AM)
|
Tantrika
Miss Ann Thrope




Registered: 03/26/12
Posts: 17,138
Loc: Lashed to the pyre
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Metoo] 2
#26393437 - 12/21/19 03:04 AM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Metoo said:
Quote:
Tantrika said:
Was the Clinton impeachment bipartisan?
is the impeachment process for Trump bipartisan, or is the support for him that sought to obstruct impeachment bipartisan? Would there have been a threshhold for Trump's activities that qualified him for impeachment that the Republicans would have actually sided with, or is Impeachment going to be bipartisan as long as the system is two-party?
There were five Democrats voting to impeach Clinton so in that sense it was bipartisan.
The motion to impeach Trump was partisan because no Republican representatives supported it. His defence was less partisan because a handful of Dems crossed the floor. Impeachment was devised as a bipartisan measure to prevent this exact scenario i.e. one party controlling the House impeaching a president without any support from the opposition representatives.
There is no threshold of guilt above which a partisan impeachment becomes constitutional. My speculation is that the Fathers assumed that an obvious act of high crimes or misdemeanor will always generate bipartisan pushback. It clearly did not happen in this case.
So ultimately it appears to be the case that partisan split on impeachment is not meaningful as one party can completely stall legitimate process by voting against it, even if it is a sound measure for impeachment it's not about what is best for the country or what citizens want, it becomes an issue of two-party tug of war

Think that Tulsi Gabbard had the "best" opposition position by voting present rather than against she recognized the issue was not valid to vote against, but did not want to be involved in a partisan split it seems that Republicans that similiarily cared about their country, more than about sticking it to the Democrats, would have also opted to vote present rather than against
|
Metoo
Stranger


Registered: 10/13/18
Posts: 1,524
Last seen: 2 hours, 43 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: JohnRainy] 1
#26393448 - 12/21/19 03:24 AM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
JohnRainy said: The partisanship quality is redundant to take note of within a partisan system. It's often going to be apparently partisan.
(...)
The impeachment was based on what came out of a whistleblower's complaint, not on the fact that Trump is not a Democrat. If the democrats case was 'trump is not a republican therefore he must be impeached', that would not be constitutionally valid. Neither would trying to remove him because it would facilitate their agenda.
(...)
Alexander Hamilton said impeachable offences “are those offenses which proceed from the misconduct of public men … from the abuse or violation of some public trust.”
The partisan / bipartisan distinction is fully relevant in a partisan political system. Bipartisan motions, as rising above the political divisions, carry more authority and can be expected to attract a wider popular support. This is why impeachment, which would otherwise stir social divisions, was meant to be an exclusively bipartisan proposition.
The impeachment was not put in motion by the whistleblower but by the Dems - without any bipartisan support. They did it precisely to facilitate their political agenda of, well - getting rid of Donalds Trump.
Alexander Hamilton said that impeachment is not supposed to be a partisan motion, which this one clearly was
|
Metoo
Stranger


Registered: 10/13/18
Posts: 1,524
Last seen: 2 hours, 43 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Tantrika] 1
#26393453 - 12/21/19 03:36 AM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Tantrika said: So ultimately it appears to be the case that partisan split on impeachment is not meaningful as one party can completely stall legitimate process by voting against it, even if it is a sound measure for impeachment it's not about what is best for the country or what citizens want, it becomes an issue of two-party tug of war

Think that Tulsi Gabbard had the "best" opposition position by voting present rather than against she recognized the issue was not valid to vote against, but did not want to be involved in a partisan split it seems that Republicans that similiarily cared about their country, more than about sticking it to the Democrats, would have also opted to vote present rather than against
Impeachment was supposed to be an exclusively bipartisan notion precisely to prevent it from becoming a political tug-of-war. As I speculated above, the Fathers probably assumed that a "legitimate" process would always attract bipartisan support.
I also mentioned in one of my posts that Tulsi took the moral high ground in the whole affair.
|
Tantrika
Miss Ann Thrope




Registered: 03/26/12
Posts: 17,138
Loc: Lashed to the pyre
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Metoo]
#26393455 - 12/21/19 03:40 AM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Metoo said:
Quote:
Tantrika said: So ultimately it appears to be the case that partisan split on impeachment is not meaningful as one party can completely stall legitimate process by voting against it, even if it is a sound measure for impeachment it's not about what is best for the country or what citizens want, it becomes an issue of two-party tug of war

Think that Tulsi Gabbard had the "best" opposition position by voting present rather than against she recognized the issue was not valid to vote against, but did not want to be involved in a partisan split it seems that Republicans that similiarily cared about their country, more than about sticking it to the Democrats, would have also opted to vote present rather than against
Impeachment was supposed to be an exclusively bipartisan notion precisely to prevent it from becoming a political tug-of-war. As I speculated above, the Fathers probably assumed that a "legitimate" process would always attract bipartisan support.
I also mentioned in one of my posts that Tulsi took the moral high ground in the whole affair.
assuming bipartisan support seems like a strong, well, assumption
Does the house have any third-party or non-affiliated/non-partisan representatives not beholden to party voting lines?
would think that their positions prolly serve as the most powerful barometer for relative validity of impeachment in this scenario as they don't have to worry about ostracization by their party for not following a party position they are outside of the tug of war
to my comprehension, third-party is basically forced out of the US political system tho
agree with Tulsi taking the moral high ground tho, it is a shame so many Republicans insisted on partisan tactics instead of recognition of the issues at play
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,049
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 4 hours, 7 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Tantrika] 1
#26393458 - 12/21/19 03:47 AM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
The one independent in the house voted for impeachment.
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
Tantrika
Miss Ann Thrope




Registered: 03/26/12
Posts: 17,138
Loc: Lashed to the pyre
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: koods]
#26393461 - 12/21/19 03:51 AM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
koods said: The one independent in the house voted for impeachment.
that would more or less settle it in my mind, then
can prolly be assumed from the start that Republicans would not vote to impeach one of their (recently adopted) own
someone who does not have to answer to the elite of the party before the people of the nation is prolly the most in line with the Founding Fathers' values
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,049
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 4 hours, 7 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: koods]
#26393463 - 12/21/19 03:53 AM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Impeachment was supposed to be an exclusively bipartisan notion
You are making this up.
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,049
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 4 hours, 7 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Tantrika] 1
#26393464 - 12/21/19 03:54 AM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Tantrika said:
Quote:
koods said: The one independent in the house voted for impeachment.
that would more or less settle it in my mind, then
can prolly be assumed from the start that Republicans would not vote to impeach one of their (recently adopted) own
someone who does not have to answer to the elite of the party before the people of the nation is prolly the most in line with the Founding Fathers' values
He left the Republican Party earlier this year. He’s actually quite conservative and was originally elected as a tea party candidate.
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
Tantrika
Miss Ann Thrope




Registered: 03/26/12
Posts: 17,138
Loc: Lashed to the pyre
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: koods] 1
#26393470 - 12/21/19 04:05 AM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
koods said:
Quote:
Tantrika said:
Quote:
koods said: The one independent in the house voted for impeachment.
that would more or less settle it in my mind, then
can prolly be assumed from the start that Republicans would not vote to impeach one of their (recently adopted) own
someone who does not have to answer to the elite of the party before the people of the nation is prolly the most in line with the Founding Fathers' values
He left the Republican Party earlier this year. He’s actually quite conservative and was originally elected as a tea party candidate.
Most awesome Republican I've known decided he would rather die early than support Trump as the party candidate
|
JohnRainy
Stranger

Registered: 07/09/19
Posts: 1,244
Last seen: 3 years, 11 months
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: koods]
#26393473 - 12/21/19 04:10 AM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Alexander Hamilton wrote
Quote:
impeachment “will seldom fail to agitate the passions of the whole community, and to divide it into parties more or less friendly or inimical to the accused. In many cases it will connect itself with the pre-existing factions, and will enlist all their animosities, partialities, influence, and interest on one side or on the other.”
And: “In such cases there will always be the greatest danger that the decision will be regulated more by the comparative strength of parties, than by the real demonstrations of innocence or guilt.”
That's not even about republicans and democrats. He's talking about the breakdown of reason as people consolidate into camps of opinion on an inflaming question at hand.
There is nothing in the constitution that says all parties must be represented in an affirmative vote to impeach. Its a majority in congress that is required.
And there were demonstrations of guilt, as Alexander Hamilton would have wanted. The Senate has not yet resolved to demonstrate any innocence though, even thought it plans to acquit. Why is the senate not demonstrating innocence as Alexander Hamilton would have wanted? The senate's behaviour is Hamilton's fear. It's using comparative strength of parties rather than demonstrating innocence to get Trump's acquittal.
As Mr Hamilton said, impeachments should not be partisan. They should demonstrate guilt or innocence to reach their conclusions. The congress has done that, the senate plans not to.
Edited by JohnRainy (12/21/19 04:17 AM)
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,049
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 4 hours, 7 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: JohnRainy]
#26393483 - 12/21/19 04:33 AM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
He seems to be just observing that there will be a partisan divide, but the strength of the case is what matters.
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
JohnRainy
Stranger

Registered: 07/09/19
Posts: 1,244
Last seen: 3 years, 11 months
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: koods]
#26393488 - 12/21/19 04:57 AM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
The nature of the parties he's talking about here is derived from the effect the impeachment will have on the 'whole community'.
This quote would indicate that he considers a congress made up of whatever parties the 'whole community', rendering affiliation to a political party irrelevant, since the feared irrational parties that 'seldom fail' to form here during impeachment come from 'friendly or inimical' tendencies, rather than political party affiliation, which conveniently invalidates this latest diversion from the question at hand that Trump wants to make sure nobody thinks about.
Yes there will be partisanship but not the kind based on being an R or a D. It's partisanship of inimicals and friendlies.
Trump does not want the senate to demonstrate his innocence. The senate does not want demonstrate his innocence. Alexander Hamilton was afraid this might happen.
Edited by JohnRainy (12/21/19 05:30 AM)
|
LogicaL Chaos
Ascension Energy & Alien UFOs




Registered: 05/12/07
Posts: 69,328
Loc: The Inexpressible...
Last seen: 11 minutes, 59 seconds
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Metoo]
#26393703 - 12/21/19 08:31 AM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Its an intereating viewpoint. Did the Dems of the House "abuse" their powers by leading impeachment? Or did the Republicians abuse their power by supporting Trump's actions?
It would appear that both sides are biased in their views. Of course i side with Democrats as i see Trump clearly abusing his Position as President for personal gain in the 2020 election then covering it up by blocking access from Congress. That is clear to me.
You would think that Republicans would also see this clear abuse of power by Trump, but from the House vote, this is clearly not the case and it highlights the bias nature of both political parties. If Trump was a Democratic (purely hypothetical), would the House votes be just the opposite? With Democrats supporting him and Republicans wanting impeachment? Its hard to say but it would seem yes, it would be partisan support.
To me, the soley Democratic support for impeachment shows how the US political system is broken and needs a new design. To have only Democratic support in the House shows that there is clearly bias in the interpretation of what is considered "Presidental Abuse of Power" and Republicans are just not seeing the bigger issue at hand here.
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,049
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 4 hours, 7 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: LogicaL Chaos]
#26393718 - 12/21/19 08:43 AM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Trump could never have succeeded as a democrat
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 21 days
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: JohnRainy]
#26393894 - 12/21/19 11:36 AM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
I'll ask an open question for anyone on the left about whether you think Clinton should have been impeached or not?
(I personally think it was a stupid issue to go after Clinton for, but then again, it seems he did lie under oath.)
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Metoo
Stranger


Registered: 10/13/18
Posts: 1,524
Last seen: 2 hours, 43 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: JohnRainy]
#26393955 - 12/21/19 12:24 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
JohnRainy wrote:
That's not even about republicans and democrats. He's talking about the breakdown of reason as people consolidate into camps of opinion on an inflaming question at hand.
(...)
As Mr Hamilton said, impeachments should not be partisan. They should demonstrate guilt or innocence to reach their conclusions. The congress has done that, the senate plans not to.
This is precisely about the GOP and Dems - the two "pre-existing factions" enlisting "all their animosities, partialities, influence, and interest on one side or on the other.”
Whether the Senate convinces you or anyone else of Trumps innocence is besides the focus of this thread but, for what it is worth, there are those who believe there is no case to answer. Mr Hamilton wanted impeachment to be bipartisan to take the politically motivated judgement bias out of the equation as much as possible.
|
Metoo
Stranger


Registered: 10/13/18
Posts: 1,524
Last seen: 2 hours, 43 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: LogicaL Chaos] 1
#26393985 - 12/21/19 12:42 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
LogicaL Chaos said: To me, the soley Democratic support for impeachment shows how the US political system is broken and needs a new design. To have only Democratic support in the House shows that there is clearly bias in the interpretation of what is considered "Presidental Abuse of Power" and Republicans are just not seeing the bigger issue at hand here.
Yes and no. The Fathers were not dumb and foresaw the political polarity likely to develop in the future. To prevent this additional politically motivated bias from affecting a process like impeachment they specifically prescribed bipartisan support as a pre-requisite for initiating it. So, in that sense, the system has a safeguard against the current scenario of the country ripping itself apart for no gain (Senate will acquit) but the Dems violated it by going after Trump without GOP support.
To start an impeachment push without control of the Senate and without GOP support was just trying to humiliate and weaken Trump - something politicians do to one another all the time. Impeachment was never meant to be used in this way, regardless of how convinced you are that Trump has abused his position
Edited by Metoo (12/21/19 12:44 PM)
|
Metoo
Stranger


Registered: 10/13/18
Posts: 1,524
Last seen: 2 hours, 43 minutes
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said: I'll ask an open question for anyone on the left about whether you think Clinton should have been impeached or not?
(I personally think it was a stupid issue to go after Clinton for, but then again, it seems he did lie under oath.)
I am not on the left but agree with you - it was a silly transgression but his lies made it into an impeachable offence. Since there was a degree of bipartisan support and appetite for a scrap the wheels got grinding...
|
JohnRainy
Stranger

Registered: 07/09/19
Posts: 1,244
Last seen: 3 years, 11 months
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Metoo]
#26393993 - 12/21/19 12:50 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
He just said matter-of-factly that the whole community will divide into parties over an issue such as impeachment. He didn't say that isn't allowed to happen. He said it will seldom fail to happen.
He wanted the conclusions based on demonstrations of guilt or innocence, rather than comparative strength of parties. The republicans did not attempt to demonstrate innocence during the hearing. They just tried to avoid the question and make a big distracting commotion, but their comparative partisan strength did not allow for the shenanigans to be successful in the congress.
In the senate, they have already announced they will bring Hamilton's concern to life and use their comparative strength of party to acquit rather than demonstrate innocence to acquit.
Quote:
Mr Hamilton wanted impeachment to be bipartisan
. Where does he say that?
|
JohnRainy
Stranger

Registered: 07/09/19
Posts: 1,244
Last seen: 3 years, 11 months
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said: I'll ask an open question for anyone on the left about whether you think Clinton should have been impeached or not?
(I personally think it was a stupid issue to go after Clinton for, but then again, it seems he did lie under oath.)
I don't understand how he was ever asked such a question in an under oath situation. Did important United States business hinge on whether or not he had his pants on all day that day?
Because if it didn't, then that encounter is the business of Bill Clinton, his wife, and Monica Lewinsky. And nobody else's.
|
Metoo
Stranger


Registered: 10/13/18
Posts: 1,524
Last seen: 2 hours, 43 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: JohnRainy]
#26394017 - 12/21/19 01:09 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
JohnRainy said:
He wanted the conclusions based on demonstrations of guilt or innocence, rather than comparative strength of parties. The republicans did not attempt to demonstrate innocence during the hearing. They just tried to avoid the question and make a big distracting commotion, but their comparative partisan strength did not allow for the shenanigans to be successful in the congress.
I agree - recognizing the gravity of deposing a democratically elected president he wanted a process based on a judgement of innocence and guilt, not relative strength of the political forces in play. Then - crucially - he understood the level of rationality required for this could not happen if a partisan motion was executed because all pre-existing animosities would kick in and the process would degrade into a show of partisan influence. How right was he!
I think part of the issue is a popular misconception that impeachment is just another tool to use when a president misbehaves. The way I understand the writings of Hamilton impeachment was not a free for all but a very serious measure to be applied only in specific situations - and only with non-partisan support.
Edited by Metoo (12/21/19 01:49 PM)
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 21 days
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Metoo]
#26394098 - 12/21/19 02:18 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Metoo said:
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said: I'll ask an open question for anyone on the left about whether you think Clinton should have been impeached or not?
I am not on the left but agree with you - it was a silly transgression but his lies made it into an impeachable offence.
Quote:
JohnRainy said: ...that encounter is the business of Bill Clinton, his wife, and Monica Lewinsky. And nobody else's.
Exactly. We all agree it was silly, but the crime was lying.
But when it comes to Trump, I'm not even clear if there was some kind of quid pro quo. I'll play this again for those that missed it the first time I posted it (watch from 4:39 - 7:30).
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
JohnRainy
Stranger

Registered: 07/09/19
Posts: 1,244
Last seen: 3 years, 11 months
|
|
Are we reading the same Alexander Hamilton? Because I have him saying...
Quote:
In such cases there will always be the greatest danger that the decision will be regulated more by the comparative strength of parties, than by the real demonstrations of innocence or guilt.
And you have him saying
Quote:
the level of rationality required for this could not happen
He did not say it could not happen. He said there is great danger of it not happening. The congress, as best can be determined from what happened, did not devolve into an irrational decision based on the comparative strength of the parties, the decision was quite rational and supported by the facts, the witnesses and the expert opinion.
Guilt was demonstrated, as Hamilton hoped would happen.
On the other hand, the senate devolved immediately into a decision based on comparative strength of parties, and not a demonstration of innocence. And the trial hasn't even begun.
Innocence will not be demonstrated, as Hamilton feared.
|
JohnRainy
Stranger

Registered: 07/09/19
Posts: 1,244
Last seen: 3 years, 11 months
|
|
Quote:
But when it comes to Trump, I'm not even clear if there was some kind of quid pro quo.
Quote:
Mr. Sondland testified that he “never” thought there was any precondition on the aid. But two weeks later, he amended his testimony, saying he had indeed told the Ukrainians that the military aid was tied to the investigations.
“I said that resumption of the U.S. aid would likely not occur until Ukraine provided the public anticorruption statement that we had been discussing for many weeks,” Mr. Sondland said in his new statement.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/20/us/politics/gordon-sondland-impeachment-hearings-testimony.html
Quote:
U.S. Ambassador Gordon Sondland told House impeachment investigators Wednesday that President Donald Trump directed Rudy Giuliani to pursue a “quid pro quo.”
The requests by Giuliani, Trump’s personal attorney, involved granting a White House meeting for Ukraine’s newly elected president, Volodymyr Zelenskiy, Sondland testified.
“Mr. Giuliani demanded that Ukraine make a public statement announcing investigations” into the 2016 U.S. presidential election and Ukrainian natural gas company Burisma Holdings, where former Vice President Joe Biden’s son Hunter had been a board member, Sondland said.
“Mr. Giuliani was expressing the desires of the president of the United States, and we knew that these investigations were important to the president,” Sondland said in his opening statement.
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/11/20/trump-ordered-ukraine-quid-pro-quo-through-giuliani-key-witness-sondland-testifies.html
Edited by JohnRainy (12/21/19 03:29 PM)
|
Brian Jones
Club 27



Registered: 12/18/12
Posts: 12,340
Loc: attending Snake Church
Last seen: 3 hours, 30 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: JohnRainy] 1
#26394237 - 12/21/19 03:40 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Bipartisanship is over. Probably permanently. The GOP impeached Bill Clinton for lying about blowjobs. The GOP Senate refused to vote on Obama's nominee for the Supreme Court. The 2000 election was decided by the Republican nominee's brother. Expecting cooperation at this point is just naïve.
-------------------- "The Rolling Stones will break up over Brian Jones' dead body" John Lennon I don't want no commies in my car. No Christians either. The worst thing about corruption is that it works so well,
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 21 days
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: JohnRainy]
#26394243 - 12/21/19 03:45 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Your news clips are from the EXCACT SAME testimony that my video showed clips of. My video shows the parts of the testimony that your mainstream news sources failed to cover.
Your news clips talk about the "bombshell" that Jimmy Dore appears to debunk.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
Edited by Falcon91Wolvrn03 (12/21/19 03:51 PM)
|
JohnRainy
Stranger

Registered: 07/09/19
Posts: 1,244
Last seen: 3 years, 11 months
|
|
Simplified response now.
Jimmy pointed out incomplete coverage of testimony from some media. The republicans established that Sondland did not receive instructions from Trump directly regarding this abuse of power.
He testified that President Trump directed his personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani to pursue a “quid pro quo” with Ukraine.
Edited by JohnRainy (12/21/19 06:24 PM)
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 21 days
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: JohnRainy]
#26394520 - 12/21/19 07:00 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
JohnRainy said: Well, I watched the part from 4:39 to 7:30, and I did not hear this from Sondland,
“Mr. Giuliani demanded that Ukraine make a public statement announcing investigations” into the 2016 U.S. presidential election and Ukrainian natural gas company Burisma Holdings, where former Vice President Joe Biden’s son Hunter had been a board member, Sondland said.
Actually, that was briefly covered from 5:49 - 5:59. Obviously you'll be able to find some things not included the two two minute video summary I provided; I was pointing out something you probably hadn't seen before.
Quote:
JohnRainy said: Nor this
“I said that resumption of the U.S. aid would likely not occur until Ukraine provided the public anticorruption statement that we had been discussing for many weeks,”
If that was part of the testimony, why did Jimmy omit it?
You're asking me why Jimmy omitted a statement from 5 Nov while covering the 20 Nov testimony?
Quote:
JohnRainy said: Mick Mulvaney said “Did he (the president) also mention to me in the past the corruption related to the DNC server? Absolutely, no question about that. But that’s it, that’s why we held up the money,”
Again, that was from well before the 20 Nov testimony. And Mulvaney since walked that back.
Quote:
JohnRainy said: More Sondland...
"Sondland complained the State Department and the White House had made preparing for his testimony “less than fair” by prohibiting access to his own documents to prepare for his testimony, and that he could not work with his staff at the U.S. embassy in Brussels to prepare. He added that he asked the State Department and the White House for his materials multiple times, but they refused to let him see them.
“Having access to the State Department materials would have been very helpful to me in trying to reconstruct with whom I spoke and met, when, and what was said,” he said. "
The White House directed Giuliani to disregard subpoenas the Congress issued in order to properly investigate all this.
Sondland said the White House blocked him from accessing 'his materials' he needed to prepare for his testimony.
You're the first I've heard argue this is the impeachable offense.
Quote:
JohnRainy said: Jimmy's little thing there was about some portion of the media omitting the republican cross examination where it was demonstrated that the United States ambassador did not directly get the instructions to hold up the military aid from the president himself.
Correct. And yet Sondland was the key witness.
Quote:
JohnRainy said: "Asked about using Rudy Giuliani, a private citizen, as an unofficial envoy, Mulvaney responded: “You may not like the fact that Giuliani was involved, that’s great, that’s fine. It’s not illegal, it’s not impeachable...the president gets to set foreign policy and he gets to choose who to do so, as long as it doesn’t violate any law.”
Quote:
the president gets to set foreign policy and he gets to choose who to do so
Does the president also get to block witnesses from appearing to congressional hearings under subpoena too?
Is this impeachable? Can you tell me in your own words what you think is impeachable? Maybe that will help me understand your position.
Edit: I just saw your simplified response. I'll get back to you on that in a moment...
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 21 days
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: JohnRainy]
#26394522 - 12/21/19 07:03 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
JohnRainy said: He testified that President Trump directed his personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani to pursue a “quid pro quo” with Ukraine.
Ok, let's discuss that. Do you have the video (or transcript)?
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
JohnRainy
Stranger

Registered: 07/09/19
Posts: 1,244
Last seen: 3 years, 11 months
|
|
Skimming the above post I would have to think all that White House stonewalling would be obstruction of justice. How else can you characterize defying a congressional subpoena?
Quote:
He testified that President Trump directed his personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani to pursue a “quid pro quo” with Ukraine.
Ok, let's discuss that. Do you have the video (or transcript)?
here is a brief Sondland excerpt.
Edited by JohnRainy (12/21/19 07:42 PM)
|
Metoo
Stranger


Registered: 10/13/18
Posts: 1,524
Last seen: 2 hours, 43 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: JohnRainy] 1
#26394588 - 12/21/19 07:59 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
JohnRainy said: The congress, as best can be determined from what happened, did not devolve into an irrational decision based on the comparative strength of the parties, the decision was quite rational and supported by the facts, the witnesses and the expert opinion.
Guilt was demonstrated, as Hamilton hoped would happen.
On the other hand, the senate devolved immediately into a decision based on comparative strength of parties, and not a demonstration of innocence. And the trial hasn't even begun.
Innocence will not be demonstrated, as Hamilton feared.
One lot of partisans - who you seem to agree with - believe the guilt has been demonstrated and the final vote was not just due to their comparative strength in the Congress. The other lot of partisans - who you disagree with - saw a different movie in which after an irrational political spectacle the vote was just a show of strength, despite no evidence for it presented.
Both sides have their arguments and none is objectively more right than the other - this is why we sometimes have hung juries after 12 random people have seen the same evidence but cannot agree on what it all meant. It is not that 6 of them were stupid and the other 6 wise but simply humans based on their individual characteristics judge the same events differently.
Hamilton knew it and understood that if two political groups take opposing stands on an issue no agreement will be reached and the vote will simply reflect their relative strength within congress or senate. To base removal of a democratically elected president on the numerical advantage one or the other party enjoys at the time the vote is taken was not what he had in mind so he advised against partisan impeachment.
|
JohnRainy
Stranger

Registered: 07/09/19
Posts: 1,244
Last seen: 3 years, 11 months
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Metoo]
#26394659 - 12/21/19 09:14 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Hamilton was aware of the vulnerabilities of the system the system the US has, and we just saw it in action. It produced what it produced. Clunky as hell and I really, really, balk at the notion that congressional subpoenas were ignored without consequence. That doesn't happen in straight halls of power. Those people should be arrested and charged for not complying with a subpoena. But the White House controls the justice department and that Barr fatso isn't going to do anything.
If Ive got it all wrong, and the impeachment and trial was all merely based on strength of parties, then the dems are kicking the repubs ass at the charade.
They were able to put on a pretty convincing show with their witnesses and experts, and Trump played right into it by ostensibly obstructing congress leading to a second article of impeachment.
The Senate isn't even pretending to be objective about this. They cannot be bothered to even put on a charade. There is no question they are are basing their acquittal on comparative strength of parties.
Let Trump answer to the charges, let witnesses be called, let there be cross examination, enforce subpoenas issued to insiders in this affair, especially Giuliani. You know, like a real trial.
Without a charade, there is no question that the conclusion is partisan.
What would Hamilton say about this senate trial if he had the same info I had? Which house would he say better demonstrated their case? Which house would he say displayed more blind partisanship in reaching their conclusions?
Edited by JohnRainy (12/21/19 09:28 PM)
|
Tantrika
Miss Ann Thrope




Registered: 03/26/12
Posts: 17,138
Loc: Lashed to the pyre
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03] 1
#26394699 - 12/21/19 09:48 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said: I'll ask an open question for anyone on the left about whether you think Clinton should have been impeached or not?
(I personally think it was a stupid issue to go after Clinton for, but then again, it seems he did lie under oath.)
personally seem to be all over the political compass like a Tulsi meme and also not a US citizen, so this is an outside view
think Clinton being impeached for lying about getting a blowjob from a White House employee was a little dumb but think that if Clinton had gotten a blowjob from a foreign diplomat or embassy worker for another nation, impeachment would have been necessary
the above embeds into my view and issue with the office of the Presidency tho
Clinton was supposed to represent Americans on the international scale, and do not feel that a happening between US citizens impacts that if he had been involved with a foreign individual tho, then that opens up questions about the capacity to continue acting effectively on the global stage while the rest of the world largely doesn't care about how US laws impact US citizens, we are aware of just how much weight the country throws around on a global stage
my "issue" with the office of the President tho is that the position is empowered with a ton of National clout as well and there are US voters who want a President that will act well in the National sphere and fuck what the rest of the world thinks while my view is that a lot of those powers should be relinquished to State or Municipal areas of government while the office of the Presidency 'should' focus on the considerable influence the US can impress on the rest of the world
|
starfire_xes
I Am 'They'



Registered: 10/24/09
Posts: 21,590
Loc: Dallas with all the assho...
Last seen: 7 months, 1 day
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Tantrika]
#26394728 - 12/21/19 10:21 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
koods said: The founders didn’t even believe there would be parties in American politics. OPs analysis is absurd.
SUDDENLY THE DEMS ARE ALL HOT AND BOTHERED ABOUT THE FOUNDING FATHERS, THE FEDERALIST PAPERS, AND THER CONSITITUITON...
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 21 days
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: JohnRainy]
#26394731 - 12/21/19 10:29 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
JohnRainy said: here is a brief Sondland excerpt.
So the quid pro quo was to exchange a white house visit for an announcement of a Biden investigation. It wasn't in exchange for military aid. Is that correct?
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Metoo
Stranger


Registered: 10/13/18
Posts: 1,524
Last seen: 2 hours, 43 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: JohnRainy]
#26394781 - 12/21/19 11:05 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
JohnRainy said:
What would Hamilton say about this senate trial if he had the same info I had? Which house would he say better demonstrated their case? Which house would he say displayed more blind partisanship in reaching their conclusions?
In my reading of things he would not judgde the relative merits of arguments on both sides - this is not a constitutional issue - but would simply conclude that, in absence of non-partisan support, the impeachment motion should not proceed.
|
JohnRainy
Stranger

Registered: 07/09/19
Posts: 1,244
Last seen: 3 years, 11 months
|
|
Yes. The ambassador said he was not told by Trump directly that the miiltary aid was tied to the investigation.
He came to believe that it was, because he can tell which way the wind is blowing and says he mentioned it to Pence, who denied that conversation when asked.
Sondland identifies Giuliani as the president's liaison here, saying "Well, when the President says talk to my personal attorney, and then Mr. Giuliani, as his personal attorney, makes certain request or demands, we assume it's coming from the President," but the White House was successful in stonewalling Giuliani's subpoena, damn I would have liked to see that!
But they were able to get Giuliani's phone records which were consistent with him being a central figure in Trump's execution of foreign policy by these parallel, non-conventional means, the records included repeated communication with the White House’s Office of Management and Budget, the very department that oversaw the aid money. The aid money that wasn't getting released because it was tied to these investigations, so believed the ambassador as he testified.
Besides all that, Giuliani went on TV and said he is an operative of the state department
Sondland was in the loop as much as he was in the loop. Everything revealed is perfectly consistent with what the congress has charged the president with doing. We need Giuliani's testimony and the records congress subpoenaed to reveal it with more clarity, but they are behind a stonewall guarded by a corrupt White House and attorney general who will not enforce the law.
Edited by JohnRainy (12/21/19 11:31 PM)
|
JohnRainy
Stranger

Registered: 07/09/19
Posts: 1,244
Last seen: 3 years, 11 months
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: JohnRainy]
#26394792 - 12/21/19 11:14 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
In my reading of things he would not judgde the relative merits of arguments on both sides - this is not a constitutional issue - but would simply conclude that, in absence of non-partisan support, the impeachment motion should not proceed.
Alexander Hamilton himself would not judge the impeachment on the innocence or guilt that was demonstrated, but rather would vote against the impeachment based on some concept pertaining to partisanship.
Does that sound right?
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 21 days
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: JohnRainy]
#26394817 - 12/21/19 11:52 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
It sounds to me like if there was that much of a divide, then guilt or innocence wasn't very clear. I think that was his point.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 21 days
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: JohnRainy]
#26394820 - 12/21/19 11:56 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Did Zelensky know about the quid pro quo for military aid? His knowledge would be imperative here, wouldn't it?
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
JohnRainy
Stranger

Registered: 07/09/19
Posts: 1,244
Last seen: 3 years, 11 months
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said: It sounds to me like if there was that much of a divide, then guilt or innocence wasn't very clear. I think that was his point. 
But Hamilton wanted decisions based on the demonstration of innocence or guilt
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 21 days
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: JohnRainy]
#26394853 - 12/22/19 12:30 AM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Right, that's when impeachments should be done.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
JohnRainy
Stranger

Registered: 07/09/19
Posts: 1,244
Last seen: 3 years, 11 months
|
|
He didn't testify at the impeachment, and all Ive heard about him is when he's asked about it, he just says his conversations with Trump and co. are private and confidential. He won't talk.
Stonewall there too. What a coincidence.
He looked positively sick at that sit down a few months ago, which must be another coincidence that has nothing to do with the weight of this imbroglio, which was just erupting yet because Trump has told us 'The call was perfect" and released a tiny portion of it which is even consistent with the things he's being accused of.
|
JohnRainy
Stranger

Registered: 07/09/19
Posts: 1,244
Last seen: 3 years, 11 months
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: JohnRainy]
#26394860 - 12/22/19 12:45 AM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Some guilt was demonstrated.
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 21 days
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: JohnRainy]
#26394861 - 12/22/19 12:45 AM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
JohnRainy
Stranger

Registered: 07/09/19
Posts: 1,244
Last seen: 3 years, 11 months
|
|
Quote:
"Look, I never talked to the president from the position of a quid pro quo. That’s not my thing," Zelensky said. "I don’t want us to look like beggars. "But you have to understand. We're at war," he added. "If you’re our strategic partner, then you can’t go blocking anything for us. I think that’s just about fairness. It’s not about a quid pro quo. It just goes without saying."
Hadn't seen that yet.
That sound duplicitous. It sounds like something to appease Trump and yet not be technically a lie. Politician talk. You know.
If you read that clarification he provided, it says he did not talk to Trump from the 'position' of a quid pro, which he implies is subordinate and would make Ukraine look like beggars. Then he explains how he rationalizes the beggar's look away.
The quid pro quo attached to the military aid was so vital to his country which was 'at war' that it made it fair to accept these requests, because it is no longer about a quid pro quo. Its about winning the war with his ally, who was holding up the aid they needed.
Zelinski did not say "Trump never attached any conditions to the military aid".
Zelinski is also the powerless one in the equation here, dealing with a White House that had already left him hanging, and we know Giuliani had still been doing things in Ukraine.
Sondland has positively testified that quid pro quo was taking place with zelinski and trump in the area of White House meetings. This had already come out by the time Zelinsky said this. Zelinski couldn't possibly have meant Trump has never quid pro quoed him, unless Sondland is lying. But Sondland wishes this whole thing wasn't real. Why would he lie? He doesn't want conflict with Trump.
This is the question Zelinski was answering in this Time magazine interview where this came from...
Quote:
When did you first sense that there was a connection between Trump’s decision to block military aid to Ukraine this summer and the two investigations that Trump and his allies were asking for? Can you clarify this issue of the quid pro quo?
The question was not "Did trump attach conditions to the aid?" The question actually assumes that a quid pro quo was taking place, and sets the stage for his duplicitous answer where he rationalizes the assumed quid pro quo.
Q Can you clarify the issue of the quid pro quo
A It's not a quid pro quo 'position' when you're allies trying to win a war.
Edited by JohnRainy (12/22/19 02:51 AM)
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 21 days
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: JohnRainy]
#26394926 - 12/22/19 03:07 AM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
JohnRainy said:
Quote:
"Look, I never talked to the president from the position of a quid pro quo. That’s not my thing," Zelensky said. "I don’t want us to look like beggars. "But you have to understand. We're at war," he added. "If you’re our strategic partner, then you can’t go blocking anything for us. I think that’s just about fairness. It’s not about a quid pro quo. It just goes without saying."
Hadn't seen that yet.
That sound duplicitous. It sounds like something to appease Trump and yet not be technically a lie. Politician talk. You know.
If you read that clarification he provided, it says he did not talk to Trump from the 'position' of a quid pro, which he implies is subordinate and would make Ukraine look like beggars. Then he explains how he rationalizes the beggar's look away.
Zelinski did not say "Trump never attached any conditions to the military aid".
Again, this makes quid pro quo very uncertain is all I'm saying.
Quote:
JohnRainy said: The quid pro quo attached to the military aid was so vital to his country which was 'at war' that it made it fair to accept these requests, because it is no longer about a quid pro quo. Its about winning the war with his ally, who was holding up the aid they needed.
I'm not sure why you think it is Vital and why you think Zelensky is trying to "win" this war. Zelensky actually has been pushing for peace in Eastern Ukraine.
Quote:
JohnRainy said: Sondland has positively testified that quid pro quo was taking place with zelinski and trump in the area of White House meetings. This had already come out by the time Zelinsky said this. Zelinski couldn't have meant Trump has never quid pro quoed him, unless Sondland is lying. But Sondland wishes this whole thing wasn't real either. Why would he lie? He doesn't want conflict with Trump.
Again, from what I've seen thus far form Sondland, the quid pro pro was for a meeting in the white house, not military aid.
Quote:
JohnRainy said: This is the question Zelinski was answering in this Time magazine interview where this came from...
Quote:
When did you first sense that there was a connection between Trump’s decision to block military aid to Ukraine this summer and the two investigations that Trump and his allies were asking for? Can you clarify this issue of the quid pro quo?
The question was not "Did trump attach conditions to the aid?" The question actually assumes that a quid pro quo was taking place, and sets the stage for his duplicitous answer where he rationalizes the assumed quid pro quo.
The question came after the media tried already pitched the quid pro quo story, that's why it was assumed. And Zelensky denied it.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Metoo
Stranger


Registered: 10/13/18
Posts: 1,524
Last seen: 2 hours, 43 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: JohnRainy] 1
#26394943 - 12/22/19 03:27 AM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
JohnRainy said: But Hamilton wanted decisions based on the demonstration of innocence or guilt
Correct. He also recognized that in a partisan impeachment motion the sides will entrench and the final vote will simply reflect the relative strengths of the opposing parties. Since in this scenario the decision is not based on demonstration of innocence and guilt he advised against partisan impeachment motions.
The fiasco playing out at the moment confirms Hamilton's intuitions. The Dems impeachment push opposed by all GOP representatives has descended into a partisan farce and the inevitable final acquittal will only reflect the fact that the Dems own the house and GOP have the Senate.
|
JohnRainy
Stranger

Registered: 07/09/19
Posts: 1,244
Last seen: 3 years, 11 months
|
|
He did not say 'there was no quid pro quo attached to the military aid'
He said it wasn't 'about' a quid pro quo, that he never talked to trump in the 'position' of one.
It was a weird, unclear statement that sounds duplicitous to me.
If Trump never quid pro quoed him, why wasn't he louder about it when the scandal broke? Why were his lips zipped shut for a time? Trump would have had him vehemently deny this if it wasn't true and he probably would have gladly done that for Trump. Instead we have these weird few lines where 'position' and 'about' come into it and that's all we have.
Are they going to call him to the senate trial, he is a central figure to this whole damn thing! Or is a vague answer from a magazine enough testimony for the senate to demonstrate innocence at the president's impeachment trial?
|
JohnRainy
Stranger

Registered: 07/09/19
Posts: 1,244
Last seen: 3 years, 11 months
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: JohnRainy]
#26394950 - 12/22/19 03:36 AM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
I'm not sure why you think it is Vital and why you think Zelensky is trying to "win" this war. Zelenski actually has been pushing for peace in Eastern Ukraine.
Zelinski said "we are at war". You don't think it's a top priority for him to win it? You don't think a country at war doesn't consider 400 million of military capital important?
Yes, Zelinski wants to win the war and have peace in Eastern Ukraine. That's winning the war for him then, if that's how he defines it. You don't win wars by not getting military capital.
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,049
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 4 hours, 7 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: JohnRainy]
#26395203 - 12/22/19 08:57 AM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Let’s pretty much discount anything zelensky says about the matter. His job is to make sure Ukraine gets aid and pissing off Donald Trump while he’s still president is counterindicated. This should be obvious.
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
JohnRainy
Stranger

Registered: 07/09/19
Posts: 1,244
Last seen: 3 years, 11 months
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: koods]
#26395650 - 12/22/19 01:44 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
It's obvious. The whole thing is obvious.
There is a lot of evidence, but I guess there is no one who will testify that Trump tied the aid to the investigation.
The ambassador believed it was. He believed it so much he told Zelinski as such, but he wasn't 'told' by Trump to do this. He came to understand it after he could not get a credible reason for the delay in aid.
So I guess the most directly provable article of impeachment is the obstruction of congress. All those subpoenas that were ignored.
I hope something juicy leaks.
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 21 days
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: JohnRainy]
#26395669 - 12/22/19 02:01 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
JohnRainy said: He did not say 'there was no quid pro quo attached to the military aid'
He said it wasn't 'about' a quid pro quo, that he never talked to trump in the 'position' of one.
It was a weird, unclear statement that sounds duplicitous to me.
Did Trump ever actually tell Zelensky he would freeze military aid if Zelensky wouldn't discuss a Biden investigation, or is there only evidence that this was a condition for a White House meeting?
Quote:
JohnRainy said: If Trump never quid pro quoed him, why wasn't he louder about it when the scandal broke? Why were his lips zipped shut for a time? Trump would have had him vehemently deny this if it wasn't true and he probably would have gladly done that for Trump. Instead we have these weird few lines where 'position' and 'about' come into it and that's all we have.
Zelensky has said repeatedly that he doesn't want get involved in US politics.
Quote:
JohnRainy said: Are they going to call him to the senate trial, he is a central figure to this whole damn thing! Or is a vague answer from a magazine enough testimony for the senate to demonstrate innocence at the president's impeachment trial?
I doubt you can call foreign leaders to trial in other countries. Imagine if Russia said he needed Trump in a Moscow court for a Bill Browder trial. I don't think that'd go over too well.
Anyway, I understand your position, but I think you're too biased to see the other side's position.
Let me demonstrate with another example:
It's my personal belief the impeachment started because Trump wanted to expose Biden corruption, but Biden is the establishment's leading presidential candidate for 2020, and that had to be stopped, so impeachment was the best way to stop it.
Whether that was the motive or not (I can't be certain), I still think there's pretty strong evidence that Biden is corrupt. Would you agree? If not, this another clear example of partisanship.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 21 days
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: JohnRainy]
#26395703 - 12/22/19 02:23 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
JohnRainy said: Zelinski said "we are at war". You don't think it's a top priority for him to win it? You don't think a country at war doesn't consider 400 million of military capital important?
Zelensky said his objective is peace, not escalation or more war, and the link I provided seems to show this.
Quote:
JohnRainy said: Yes, Zelinski wants to win the war and have peace in Eastern Ukraine. That's winning the war for him then, if that's how he defines it. You don't win wars by not getting military capital.
Ok fine. But military aid isn't required for this type of victory.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
JohnRainy
Stranger

Registered: 07/09/19
Posts: 1,244
Last seen: 3 years, 11 months
|
|
No one could testify directly to Trump conditioning the military aid. I guess the stonewall held there.
And yeah, the fact that Biden and most of the Dems are as corrupt as the day is long doesn't help things.
The Zelinski thing is funny to me. Surely if he could confirm Trump's innocence he'd have made clear and direct statements in his favour. He said that weird thing in Time magazine, and Trump seized on that like it was an exoneration of sorts.
There may be no way to subpoena him, and that's fine if there isn't. He could still make comments. He can still be asked to say something about this and clarify what was going on on his end. But all we have is that weird statement following an Eddy Tightlips act. He was never asked "Did the Trump administration condition military aid to the Burisma investigation " and he still has not directly said that he didn't.
If the Repubs have cast doubt on the conditioning of the aid, there is still the issue of obstruction of congress. I wonder if that will ever get addressed.
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 21 days
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: JohnRainy]
#26395711 - 12/22/19 02:26 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
I hear what you're saying, and I'm not even saying you're wrong. I'm just trying to present the other side's view.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
JohnRainy
Stranger

Registered: 07/09/19
Posts: 1,244
Last seen: 3 years, 11 months
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: JohnRainy] 1
#26395713 - 12/22/19 02:26 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Heads of state always say the objective of war is peace. He's not going to say his objective is never ending war.
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 21 days
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: JohnRainy]
#26395765 - 12/22/19 03:03 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
I guess you didn't read the article. Zelensky's already agreed to a ceasefire.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
JohnRainy
Stranger

Registered: 07/09/19
Posts: 1,244
Last seen: 3 years, 11 months
|
|
What is your point with this thing with the military aid?
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 21 days
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: JohnRainy] 1
#26395817 - 12/22/19 03:30 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
You said "the military aid was so vital to his country". I'm saying it's not really so vital. In fact, I think Zelensky would rather use the money for things that benefit average Ukrainian citizens.
Your point of view is very US centric, and that may be why the United States wasn't even invited to the negotiations. It should just be about who has the biggest/most guns.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,049
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 4 hours, 7 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03] 1
#26395866 - 12/22/19 03:53 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
He specifically asked for javelin missiles.
Discussing this topic with you is pointless. You cannot debate anything having to do with Russia with an open mind.
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 21 days
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: koods]
#26395876 - 12/22/19 03:59 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
koods said: He specifically asked for javelin missiles.
Discussing this topic with you is pointless. You cannot debate anything having to do with Russia with an open mind.
And now that the US is out of the negotiation picture, he is specifically asking for peace.
The US only knows how to negotiate by saying "if we don't get our way, we'll beat you up (with our javelin missiles)!"
Ukraine is doing better than that now.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,049
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 4 hours, 7 minutes
|
|
I’m sure he wants peace. You don’t get peace being defenseless. You get over run by the imperialist Russian dictator
The Ukraine shouldn’t be taking military advice from Putin’s shroomery mouthpiece
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
Edited by koods (12/22/19 04:09 PM)
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 21 days
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: koods]
#26395886 - 12/22/19 04:09 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
You were just proven wrong. 
Again, that's the America-centric attitude. America wasn't invited to these negotiations.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Metoo
Stranger


Registered: 10/13/18
Posts: 1,524
Last seen: 2 hours, 43 minutes
|
|
For those who believe that the House vote was not partisan but rather based on the demonstration of guilt:
"One of the county chairman came to me and said, 'I have to speak with you.' And I said, 'sure' and sat down. He said, 'I just want to let you know that you have to vote for impeachment.' I said, 'What do you mean?' He said, 'You've got to vote for impeachment. If you don't, you're not going to be able to run in my county,'" Van Drew said, without naming the county party chair.
|
Metoo
Stranger


Registered: 10/13/18
Posts: 1,524
Last seen: 2 hours, 43 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Metoo]
#26396006 - 12/22/19 05:26 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Some more:
Robert Ray served as the independent counsel from 1999 to 2002, during which he led the investigation into the Whitewater controversy.
Robert Ray: I hate to sound too practical about this, but the trial of an impeachment by the Senate is all about counting votes. This impeachment effort is an entirely partisan effort (as evidenced by the House vote on the two articles) that will not even garner a majority of the Senate, much less the vote of two-thirds of that body necessary for removal of the President from office.
Consequently, it is entirely proper for a Senate majority to say in answer to this partisan House endeavor that no trial is warranted unless and until there is bipartisan support for impeachment. Otherwise, as Sen. Mitch McConnell has noted already, this President or any President is subject to impeachment at the whim of an "intemperate" (Hamilton's word) majority of the House.
Frankly, I think the Senate needs to send the House a strong message that -- absent bipartisan consensus -- there will be no trial, no witnesses and no further delay of the people's business. That can be accomplished at the earliest available opportunity by granting a proper motion by the President through his counsel to dismiss the impeachment articles in the Senate. That can be accomplished by a simple vote of the Republican majority. I believe it will pass in January.
Edited by Metoo (12/22/19 05:28 PM)
|
JohnRainy
Stranger

Registered: 07/09/19
Posts: 1,244
Last seen: 3 years, 11 months
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said: You said "the military aid was so vital to his country". I'm saying it's not really so vital. In fact, I think Zelensky would rather use the money for things that benefit average Ukrainian citizens.
Your point of view is very US centric, and that may be why the United States wasn't even invited to the negotiations. It should just be about who has the biggest/most guns.
It's vital to his country in the sense that he claims they are at war.
Within an assumption of war, military capital is vital. He said they are at war. States don't always tell the truth, but whatever the state says is happening is what it orients it's policy around.
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 21 days
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: JohnRainy]
#26396072 - 12/22/19 06:01 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
They are at war. But they managed to negotiate a ceasefire without US involvement and without US Javelins. And with a ceasefire, Javelins are no longer necessary.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
JohnRainy
Stranger

Registered: 07/09/19
Posts: 1,244
Last seen: 3 years, 11 months
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: JohnRainy]
#26396086 - 12/22/19 06:08 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Consequently, it is entirely proper for a Senate majority to say in answer to this partisan House endeavor that no trial is warranted unless and until there is bipartisan support for impeachment
Wow. That's what they are trying to push now. You can't impeach a president unless his own party goes along with it too to some undefined extent.
Im pretty sure that is not the case legally right now.
At some place the congress is seen as a democratic expression of the people. Whatever it decides is too. If it votes to impeach, that's a democratic expression of the people, as much as such a thing can be expressed within the system.
|
JohnRainy
Stranger

Registered: 07/09/19
Posts: 1,244
Last seen: 3 years, 11 months
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: JohnRainy]
#26396089 - 12/22/19 06:10 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said: They are at war. But they managed to negotiate a ceasefire without US involvement and without US Javelins. And with a ceasefire, Javelins are no longer necessary.
Is that the president of Ukraine's position? They don't need this military aid anymore?
|
Metoo
Stranger


Registered: 10/13/18
Posts: 1,524
Last seen: 2 hours, 43 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: JohnRainy]
#26396108 - 12/22/19 06:28 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
JohnRainy said: Wow. That's what they are trying to push now. You can't impeach a president unless his own party goes along with it too to some undefined extent.
Im pretty sure that is not the case legally right now.
At some place the congress is seen as a democratic expression of the people. Whatever it decides is too. If it votes to impeach, that's a democratic expression of the people, as much as such a thing can be expressed within the system.
Inpeachment is not a legal but rather a political process so your objection is ill founded. Besides, Senate is seen as a democratic expression of the people. Whatever it decides is too. If it votes to dismiss the Congess motion, that's a democratic expression of the people, as much as such a thing can be expressed within the system
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,049
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 4 hours, 7 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Metoo]
#26396119 - 12/22/19 06:33 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Metoo said: For those who believe that the House vote was not partisan but rather based on the demonstration of guilt:
"One of the county chairman came to me and said, 'I have to speak with you.' And I said, 'sure' and sat down. He said, 'I just want to let you know that you have to vote for impeachment.' I said, 'What do you mean?' He said, 'You've got to vote for impeachment. If you don't, you're not going to be able to run in my county,'" Van Drew said, without naming the county party chair.
“Without naming the party chair. “
Fake news
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,049
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 4 hours, 7 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: JohnRainy]
#26396124 - 12/22/19 06:36 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
JohnRainy said:
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said: They are at war. But they managed to negotiate a ceasefire without US involvement and without US Javelins. And with a ceasefire, Javelins are no longer necessary.
Is that the president of Ukraine's position? They don't need this military aid anymore?
The latest funding bill had aid for Ukraine and trump thretened to veto because of it. Zelensky knows trump has it out for him and his countryand he’a dealing with a sociopath
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
JohnRainy
Stranger

Registered: 07/09/19
Posts: 1,244
Last seen: 3 years, 11 months
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Metoo]
#26396143 - 12/22/19 06:46 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Besides, Senate is seen as a democratic expression of the people. Whatever it decides is too. If it votes to dismiss the Congess motion, that's a democratic expression of the people, as much as such a thing can be expressed within the system
Exactly. There is no legal issue with party affiliation of the members and how it plays out in how they vote. The congress is following the law, and the senate is following the law. Why are people complaining about the partisan aspect of the process? Are they butthurt Trump got reprimanded so they are trying to invalidate it?
Edited by JohnRainy (12/22/19 07:12 PM)
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,049
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 4 hours, 7 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: JohnRainy]
#26396195 - 12/22/19 07:17 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
I will point out once again when the constitution was written senators were appointed not elected
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
JohnRainy
Stranger

Registered: 07/09/19
Posts: 1,244
Last seen: 3 years, 11 months
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: koods]
#26396204 - 12/22/19 07:21 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
How does that fit with this?
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,049
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 4 hours, 7 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: JohnRainy] 1
#26396261 - 12/22/19 07:51 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Hamilton argued the senate should be jurors because they are not beholden to the electorate. Kinda renders what Hamilton said about impeachment moot since the system he designed doesn’t even exist anymore
It’s pretty clear if you read him that with an elected senate he would have chosen the Supreme Court to try impeachments
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
Edited by koods (12/22/19 07:53 PM)
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,049
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 4 hours, 7 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: koods]
#26396264 - 12/22/19 07:57 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
If you think people think the house process was unfair just wait until you have a trial without any witnesses. Even the stupidest American knows witness testimony is what makes a trial a trial.
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
JohnRainy
Stranger

Registered: 07/09/19
Posts: 1,244
Last seen: 3 years, 11 months
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: koods]
#26396295 - 12/22/19 08:22 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Hamilton argued the senate should be jurors because they are not beholden to the electorate. Kinda renders what Hamilton said about impeachment moot since the system he designed doesn’t even exist anymore
Oh.
Yeah I guess that does change things.
Im just waiting to see if the senate can demonstrate Trump's innocence as convincingly as the Congress demonstrated his guilt.
I'd really, really like to see him answer for the white house obstructing congress, specifically the ignoring of subpoenas.
That just blows my mind that they could even attempt such a thing, and Im not hearing a lot of noise about it. It's allowing the executive branch to be lawless, which Trump likes to say he has the right to be as president.
It's just fucking crazy. How can anyone support a president who argues he can shoot you and get away with it? Imagine if Obama had argued that!
President Donald Trump’s personal attorney Rudy Giuliani has defied a subpoena issued as part of the investigation led by the House Foreign Affairs, Intelligence, and Oversight Committees
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 21 days
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: JohnRainy]
#26396554 - 12/22/19 11:38 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
JohnRainy said:
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said: You said "the military aid was so vital to his country". I'm saying it's not really so vital.
It's vital to his country in the sense that he claims they are at war.
Quote:
JohnRainy said:
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said: They are at war. But they managed to negotiate a ceasefire without US involvement and without US Javelins. And with a ceasefire, Javelins are no longer necessary.
Is that the president of Ukraine's position? They don't need this military aid anymore?
I was simply pointing out that I don't think javelins are "vital". Zelensky ran on a platform of peace with Donbass.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Metoo
Stranger


Registered: 10/13/18
Posts: 1,524
Last seen: 2 hours, 43 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: JohnRainy]
#26396559 - 12/22/19 11:50 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
JohnRainy said: Exactly. There is no legal issue with party affiliation of the members and how it plays out in how they vote. The congress is following the law, and the senate is following the law. Why are people complaining about the partisan aspect of the process? Are they butthurt Trump got reprimanded so they are trying to invalidate it?
So you will be ok with the Senate dismissing the Congress impeachment motion?
|
JohnRainy
Stranger

Registered: 07/09/19
Posts: 1,244
Last seen: 3 years, 11 months
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Metoo]
#26396582 - 12/23/19 12:24 AM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
If they demonstrate as much innocence as the congress has demonstrated guilt, I will be fine with it. Even if the vote is partisan.
Im afraid the senate is not planning to hold a real trial though. That's the word anyway. I feel the congress did a real investigation so at this point they hold the high ground.
|
Metoo
Stranger


Registered: 10/13/18
Posts: 1,524
Last seen: 2 hours, 43 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: JohnRainy]
#26396622 - 12/23/19 01:09 AM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
JohnRainy said: If they demonstrate as much innocence as the congress has demonstrated guilt, I will be fine with it. Even if the vote is partisan.
Im afraid the senate is not planning to hold a real trial though. That's the word anyway. I feel the congress did a real investigation so at this point they hold the high ground.
I was asking if you are happy to accept that the Senate may decide to dismiss the impeachment motion on the grounds that it was not bipartisan, without going through the trial. After all the Senate is seen as a democratic expression of the people. Whatever it decides is too. If it votes to dismiss the Congess motion, that's a democratic expression of the people, as much as such a thing can be expressed within the system.
|
JohnRainy
Stranger

Registered: 07/09/19
Posts: 1,244
Last seen: 3 years, 11 months
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Metoo]
#26396635 - 12/23/19 01:20 AM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
No I would not find that satisfying.
The senate may be a democratic expression of the people, but it is bound by the law. There is no law that can be pointed to that invalidates the findings of the congress on a concept of partisanship like this. The congress comes to resolutions by majority vote, regardless of the partisan make up that may take. And it's legitimate.
The senate must respect that and hold a trial. And I hope they hold an honest one. But I know they won't.
|
JohnRainy
Stranger

Registered: 07/09/19
Posts: 1,244
Last seen: 3 years, 11 months
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: JohnRainy]
#26396643 - 12/23/19 01:24 AM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
It must be Trump's influence that you entertain such thoughts. They're in the halls of power now so they can do anything regardless of what the law may be.
Trump thinks he should be able to shoot people and get away wth it.
This is the place the United States has come to.
|
Metoo
Stranger


Registered: 10/13/18
Posts: 1,524
Last seen: 2 hours, 43 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: JohnRainy]
#26396657 - 12/23/19 01:39 AM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
JohnRainy said: No I would not find that satisfying.
The senate may be a democratic expression of the people, but it is bound by the law. There is no law that can be pointed to that invalidates the findings of the congress on a concept of partisanship like this. The congress comes to resolutions by majority vote, regardless of the partisan make up that may take. And it's legitimate.
The senate must respect that and hold a trial. And I hope they hold an honest one. But I know they won't.
This is not a legal process but rather a political one. There is a view held by some that, based on the writings of the Fathers, unless an impeachment motion is bipartisan it is void. Senate is seen as a democratic expression of the people and may at its discretion side with this view and dismiss the impeachment motion as void. I mean there would be a vote on it so that all Senators will be able to articulate their position, to make the process completely democratic. That should be fine by you - a democratic decision by the elected representatives voting along party lines?
Edited by Metoo (12/23/19 01:40 AM)
|
JohnRainy
Stranger

Registered: 07/09/19
Posts: 1,244
Last seen: 3 years, 11 months
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Metoo] 2
#26396676 - 12/23/19 01:52 AM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Interpretations of founding fathers literature is not the law.
The constitution states that congress has the sole power to impeach. That's what they did.
The law is clear. The senate must hold a trial, and that's it.
|
JohnRainy
Stranger

Registered: 07/09/19
Posts: 1,244
Last seen: 3 years, 11 months
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: JohnRainy]
#26396691 - 12/23/19 02:09 AM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Fox News had a lawyer named Robert Ray come on and say that the senate should ignore the impeachment.
|
Metoo
Stranger


Registered: 10/13/18
Posts: 1,524
Last seen: 2 hours, 43 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: JohnRainy]
#26396696 - 12/23/19 02:15 AM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
JohnRainy said: Interpretations of founding fathers literature is not the law.
The constitution states that congress has the sole power to impeach. That's what they did.
The law is clear. The senate must hold a trial, and that's it.
No the Senate does not have to hold the trial. After Robert Ray: The Constitution says only that the Senate has the "sole power to try all impeachments." (Art. I, sec. 3., cl. 6). That doesn't mean that it has to exercise that power. And there's nothing in the Constitution that says otherwise.
Congress has the sole power to impeach and used it. Senate is under no obligation to hold a trial. It can decide to dismiss the impeachment notion. The Senate is seen as a democratic expression of the people. Whatever it decides is too. If it votes to dismiss the impeachment motion, that's a democratic expression of the people, as much as such a thing can be expressed within the system.
|
Brian Jones
Club 27



Registered: 12/18/12
Posts: 12,340
Loc: attending Snake Church
Last seen: 3 hours, 30 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Metoo] 3
#26396860 - 12/23/19 06:39 AM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Please try to remember that the definition of the Congress is the Senate and the House of Representatives.
It's a common mistake to think the Congress is the House, but it's an uninformed one, like mixing up impeaching the President and convicting him of impeachment.
-------------------- "The Rolling Stones will break up over Brian Jones' dead body" John Lennon I don't want no commies in my car. No Christians either. The worst thing about corruption is that it works so well,
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,049
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 4 hours, 7 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Brian Jones]
#26396889 - 12/23/19 07:13 AM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Seven pages of metoo saying the same ahistorical thing over and over. Trump has been impeached. There is nothing in the constitution about bipartisanship. Time to move on.
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
starfire_xes
I Am 'They'



Registered: 10/24/09
Posts: 21,590
Loc: Dallas with all the assho...
Last seen: 7 months, 1 day
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: koods] 1
#26396958 - 12/23/19 08:20 AM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Trump should be thrown out of office immediately. After all, Eric Swallwell and Shitty Schiff saw that all the evidence that made Trump guilty. After all, the steel dossier was the key to get rid of trump. And Muller--he went down with the Special Prosecutor probe, too bad for that.
They should get Trump now--a bunch of butt--hurt deep state government people, and some Trump hating law professors testify that they know Trump was guilty. So where is all that evidence? I want to see it. Maybe the media will have a bunch of BOMBSHELL REPORTS that will prove that Trump is guilty.
I can wait to see them!!   
|
christopera
Stranger


Registered: 10/13/17
Posts: 14,201
Last seen: 5 minutes, 55 seconds
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: starfire_xes] 2
#26396989 - 12/23/19 08:38 AM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
The butt hurt around Trump's impeachment is enjoyable.
-------------------- Enjoy the process of your search without succumbing to the pressure of the result. A Dorito is pizza, change my mind. Bank and Union with The Shroomery at the Zuul on The internet - now with %'s and things I’m sorry it had to be me.
|
qman
Stranger

Registered: 12/06/06
Posts: 34,927
Last seen: 1 day, 8 hours
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: JohnRainy] 1
#26397009 - 12/23/19 08:51 AM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
JohnRainy said: Interpretations of founding fathers literature is not the law.
The constitution states that congress has the sole power to impeach. That's what they did.
The law is clear. The senate must hold a trial, and that's it.
A trial would be a big waste of time the just expose the baseless claims against Trump.
|
Metoo
Stranger


Registered: 10/13/18
Posts: 1,524
Last seen: 2 hours, 43 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: koods] 1
#26397249 - 12/23/19 11:26 AM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
koods said: Seven pages of metoo saying the same ahistorical thing over and over. Trump has been impeached. There is nothing in the constitution about bipartisanship. Time to move on.
Feel free to move on
Edited by Metoo (12/23/19 11:28 AM)
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,049
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 4 hours, 7 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: qman]
#26397257 - 12/23/19 11:32 AM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
qman said:
Quote:
JohnRainy said: Interpretations of founding fathers literature is not the law.
The constitution states that congress has the sole power to impeach. That's what they did.
The law is clear. The senate must hold a trial, and that's it.
A trial would be a big waste of time the just expose the baseless claims against Trump.
Which is it? A waste of time or an exposé?
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,049
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 4 hours, 7 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: starfire_xes]
#26397263 - 12/23/19 11:34 AM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Don’t you mean Eric Swallowswell?
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
JohnRainy
Stranger

Registered: 07/09/19
Posts: 1,244
Last seen: 3 years, 11 months
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Metoo]
#26397646 - 12/23/19 02:38 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Metoo said:
Quote:
JohnRainy said: Interpretations of founding fathers literature is not the law.
The constitution states that congress has the sole power to impeach. That's what they did.
The law is clear. The senate must hold a trial, and that's it.
No the Senate does not have to hold the trial. After Robert Ray: The Constitution says only that the Senate has the "sole power to try all impeachments." (Art. I, sec. 3., cl. 6). That doesn't mean that it has to exercise that power. And there's nothing in the Constitution that says otherwise.
Congress has the sole power to impeach and used it. Senate is under no obligation to hold a trial. It can decide to dismiss the impeachment notion. The Senate is seen as a democratic expression of the people. Whatever it decides is too. If it votes to dismiss the impeachment motion, that's a democratic expression of the people, as much as such a thing can be expressed within the system.
How can democracy disregard democracy? The house of representatives(thank you brianjones) has spoken. For the other house to pretend they had nothing worthwhile to say is contempt and not consistent with a democratic republic.
If the senate wants to acquit trump, it must do so on the merits of the case, not some concept of partisanship that FOXNEWS is injecting into the air.
If the senate decides to do this, which I seriously doubt they will, but if they do, I predict the vote will coincide along party lines. When that happens, how will they be able to justify disregarding an expression of democracy based on a concept of partisanship with the same concept of partisanship they are decrying?
|
dreamachine


Registered: 11/17/19
Posts: 663
Last seen: 4 years, 1 month
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: JohnRainy]
#26397823 - 12/23/19 04:04 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
go to 8:05
Chris Delia on TFATK talking about the impeachment (~30 seconds)
--------------------
|
Metoo
Stranger


Registered: 10/13/18
Posts: 1,524
Last seen: 2 hours, 43 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: JohnRainy]
#26398098 - 12/23/19 06:39 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
JohnRainy said: How can democracy disregard democracy? The house of representatives(thank you brianjones) has spoken. For the other house to pretend they had nothing worthwhile to say is contempt and not consistent with a democratic republic.
If the senate wants to acquit trump, it must do so on the merits of the case, not some concept of partisanship that FOXNEWS is injecting into the air.
If the senate decides to do this, which I seriously doubt they will, but if they do, I predict the vote will coincide along party lines. When that happens, how will they be able to justify disregarding an expression of democracy based on a concept of partisanship with the same concept of partisanship they are decrying?
You are on your third theory trying to explain what is going on (there was no partisanship, there was partisanship but it's ok, it is democracy disregarding democracy) and still struggling. This is because we are dealing with a system operating outside its parameters and there is no good answer.
You think that people bring up Hamilton, bipartisanship, comparative strength in the Congress etc to protect Trump but the idea of bipartisan impeachment was meant to protect ANY president from being ousted by hostile partisans. Even Pelosi knows it but she got mobbed by the Dem radicals to act in violation of the rules.
The system we have cannot process a partisan impeachment and this is not by accident but by design. In the dynamic balance of power between the branches the legislators were expected to be able to get rid of a rogue president only if there was a genuine non-partisan conviction that it needed to be done.
I understand that in your opinion Trump has done enough to get impeached but there is no bipartisan agreement on this and the impeachment motion should not have proceeded. Not because Trump is somehow special but because he is not - and so deserves the same protection from partisan attacks as any other president.
Edited by Metoo (12/23/19 06:59 PM)
|
christopera
Stranger


Registered: 10/13/17
Posts: 14,201
Last seen: 5 minutes, 55 seconds
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Metoo] 2
#26398112 - 12/23/19 06:51 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
The system is going to process a partisan impeachment just fine.
-------------------- Enjoy the process of your search without succumbing to the pressure of the result. A Dorito is pizza, change my mind. Bank and Union with The Shroomery at the Zuul on The internet - now with %'s and things I’m sorry it had to be me.
|
Metoo
Stranger


Registered: 10/13/18
Posts: 1,524
Last seen: 2 hours, 43 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: christopera]
#26398127 - 12/23/19 07:02 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
christopera said: The system is going to process a partisan impeachment just fine.
And what will the end result be?
|
qman
Stranger

Registered: 12/06/06
Posts: 34,927
Last seen: 1 day, 8 hours
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Metoo] 2
#26398136 - 12/23/19 07:09 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Metoo said:
Quote:
christopera said: The system is going to process a partisan impeachment just fine.
And what will the end result be?
Creating the illusion that there's a two party system, when in fact there's only ONE party.
|
Metoo
Stranger


Registered: 10/13/18
Posts: 1,524
Last seen: 2 hours, 43 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: qman]
#26398517 - 12/24/19 02:11 AM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Merry Christmas to everyone!
Edited by Metoo (12/24/19 02:16 AM)
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 21 days
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Metoo]
#26398524 - 12/24/19 02:24 AM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,049
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 4 hours, 7 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Metoo]
#26398528 - 12/24/19 02:34 AM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Metoo said: Merry Christmas to everyone!
You’re just lucky it’s legal to say that now
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
Brian Jones
Club 27



Registered: 12/18/12
Posts: 12,340
Loc: attending Snake Church
Last seen: 3 hours, 30 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: qman]
#26398681 - 12/24/19 06:14 AM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
qman said:
Quote:
Metoo said:
Quote:
christopera said: The system is going to process a partisan impeachment just fine.
And what will the end result be?
Creating the illusion that there's a two party system, when in fact there's only ONE party.
On economics and war you're right, but there's definitely a two party system on what should happen to Trump. I know Presidents don't go to prison, but that's what my side would like to see happen.
-------------------- "The Rolling Stones will break up over Brian Jones' dead body" John Lennon I don't want no commies in my car. No Christians either. The worst thing about corruption is that it works so well,
|
qman
Stranger

Registered: 12/06/06
Posts: 34,927
Last seen: 1 day, 8 hours
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Brian Jones] 1
#26398763 - 12/24/19 07:43 AM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Brian Jones said:
Quote:
qman said:
Quote:
Metoo said:
Quote:
christopera said: The system is going to process a partisan impeachment just fine.
And what will the end result be?
Creating the illusion that there's a two party system, when in fact there's only ONE party.
On economics and war you're right, but there's definitely a two party system on what should happen to Trump. I know Presidents don't go to prison, but that's what my side would like to see happen.
Your side has been suckered into believing that the Dem's and Trump aren't on the same exact page. The Dem's know this is theater, Trump knows it's theater. The MSM knows it's theater. The corporate sponsors know it's theater. The US public thinks it's real.
While impeachment is going on, Dem's don't care about any issue and just let it slide.
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2019/12/senate-impeachment-trump-judicial-nominees.html
https://www.commondreams.org/news/2019/12/12/atrocious-188-democrats-join-gop-hand-trump-738-billion-military-budget-includes
|
Brian Jones
Club 27



Registered: 12/18/12
Posts: 12,340
Loc: attending Snake Church
Last seen: 3 hours, 30 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: qman]
#26398825 - 12/24/19 08:31 AM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Yes, the hypocrisy is deafening, but it's still economics, war and the Republican Senate confirming Trump's judges. The establishment is playing ball with the establishment, but it is the intent of the Democrats to hurt Trump as bad as they can. Yes, they're probably too inept to do it. I've long maintained that it will be NY state Dems that do him in. When he's no longer President they will convict him of criminal charges. Then he will be the useful idiot that played a role for the GOP. It will be them that played him, not the other way around.
-------------------- "The Rolling Stones will break up over Brian Jones' dead body" John Lennon I don't want no commies in my car. No Christians either. The worst thing about corruption is that it works so well,
|
Tulipslave
Homo sapiens sapiens, lol

Registered: 07/25/17
Posts: 11,111
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Brian Jones]
#26398994 - 12/24/19 11:06 AM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Brian Jones said: Yes, the hypocrisy is deafening, but it's still economics, war and the Republican Senate confirming Trump's judges. The establishment is playing ball with the establishment, but it is the intent of the Democrats to hurt Trump as bad as they can. Yes, they're probably too inept to do it. I've long maintained that it will be NY state Dems that do him in. When he's no longer President they will convict him of criminal charges. Then he will be the useful idiot that played a role for the GOP. It will be them that played him, not the other way around.
i'd bet my checking account that Trump already has his own pardon written up and ready to go.
|
JohnRainy
Stranger

Registered: 07/09/19
Posts: 1,244
Last seen: 3 years, 11 months
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Tulipslave] 1
#26399061 - 12/24/19 12:20 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Conveniently, the president has no pardon powers over his own impeachment or state level convictions, at least, according to the constitution.
Edited by JohnRainy (12/24/19 12:29 PM)
|
Tulipslave
Homo sapiens sapiens, lol

Registered: 07/25/17
Posts: 11,111
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: JohnRainy]
#26399076 - 12/24/19 12:28 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
JohnRainy said: Conveniently, the president has no pardon powers over his own impeachment or state level convictions.
considering he won't be convicted, i wasn't thinking of the impeachment. i was not aware that pardons only applied federally, but that is a good thing. thanks for the info
|
JohnRainy
Stranger

Registered: 07/09/19
Posts: 1,244
Last seen: 3 years, 11 months
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Tulipslave]
#26399078 - 12/24/19 12:30 PM (4 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
You might have people appear on FOXNEWS and say that he does though. There are a lot of cretins out there saying very dangerous, unconstitutional things.
|
Metoo
Stranger


Registered: 10/13/18
Posts: 1,524
Last seen: 2 hours, 43 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: JohnRainy] 1
#26408284 - 12/30/19 06:44 PM (4 years, 30 days ago) |
|
|
Interesting background of the current events:
Mark Zaid, one of the attorneys representing the intelligence community whistleblower at the center of the Democrats' ongoing impeachment inquiry, tweeted conspicuously in January 2017 that a "coup has started" and that "impeachment will follow ultimately."
Then, in July 2017, Zaid remarked, "I predict @CNN will play a key role in @realDonaldTrump not finishing out his full term as president." Also that month, Zaid tweeted, "We will get rid of him, and this country is strong enough to survive even him and his supporters."
"45 years from now we might be recalling stories regarding the impeachment of @realDonaldTrump. I'll be old, but will be worth the wait," Zaid wrote in June 2017.
Edited by Metoo (12/30/19 06:49 PM)
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,049
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 4 hours, 7 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Metoo]
#26408358 - 12/30/19 07:30 PM (4 years, 29 days ago) |
|
|
So what?
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 21 days
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Metoo]
#26408528 - 12/30/19 10:01 PM (4 years, 29 days ago) |
|
|
Lee Camp nails the impeachment issue.
There's a ton of things Trump should be impeached for, but the Dems want to impeach him for going after establishment corruption???
The impeachment is covered in the first 8:45 of this video.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Metoo
Stranger


Registered: 10/13/18
Posts: 1,524
Last seen: 2 hours, 43 minutes
|
|
Edited by Metoo (01/06/20 03:01 PM)
|
JohnRainy
Stranger

Registered: 07/09/19
Posts: 1,244
Last seen: 3 years, 11 months
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Metoo]
#26419540 - 01/06/20 03:38 PM (4 years, 23 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
“In the real world, when a prosecutor brings a case but refuses to try it, the court has the ability and the defendant has the right – the constitutional right, I might add -- to have those articles, those indictments, those charges dismissed," Hawley said in a speech on the Senate floor. "That is precisely the action that I am proposing today.”
What hypocrisy.
In the real world, trials have witnesses called to testify too, which is the issue.
We all want a real trial, except for the Republicans and whoever they can get to repeat their talking points that come through FOXNEWS.
|
qman
Stranger

Registered: 12/06/06
Posts: 34,927
Last seen: 1 day, 8 hours
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: JohnRainy] 1
#26419548 - 01/06/20 03:48 PM (4 years, 23 days ago) |
|
|
The whole thing has been a joke since day one, it's over. If Pelosi had anything, the trial would be in process. She obviously has nothing.
|
JohnRainy
Stranger

Registered: 07/09/19
Posts: 1,244
Last seen: 3 years, 11 months
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: qman]
#26419564 - 01/06/20 03:59 PM (4 years, 23 days ago) |
|
|
The house has articles of impeachment. That is not nothing.
The only way to get to the bottom of it satisfactorily is to have a trial. With witnesses.
But the senate has sole power of trying impeachment, so, I guess the system is set up for this sort of corruption. What are ya gonna do.
You can pretend there is nothing, I guess, without actually examining things with the precision that a trial would. You can do that.
|
qman
Stranger

Registered: 12/06/06
Posts: 34,927
Last seen: 1 day, 8 hours
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: JohnRainy]
#26419592 - 01/06/20 04:21 PM (4 years, 23 days ago) |
|
|
It's up to Pelosi at this point, so your frustration should be with her and not the current process.
So what do you think is delaying the trial?
|
Psilynut2
Stranger

Registered: 04/28/17
Posts: 5,120
Last seen: 9 hours, 13 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: qman] 2
#26419601 - 01/06/20 04:26 PM (4 years, 23 days ago) |
|
|
Bolton want to testify , Moscow Mitch knows something like that could cause a split in the party . Trump is guilty , a serious trial will display that . It’s pretty obvious ...
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,049
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 4 hours, 7 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Psilynut2]
#26419616 - 01/06/20 04:36 PM (4 years, 23 days ago) |
|
|
Of course he’s guilty. The facts in the case are clear.
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
Psilynut2
Stranger

Registered: 04/28/17
Posts: 5,120
Last seen: 9 hours, 13 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: koods]
#26419657 - 01/06/20 05:00 PM (4 years, 23 days ago) |
|
|
They don’t want witnesses because no one will lie for trump anymore . Defending trump under oath as a witness means you tell the truth and say ya he’s guilty , or lie and go to jail .
|
JohnRainy
Stranger

Registered: 07/09/19
Posts: 1,244
Last seen: 3 years, 11 months
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: qman]
#26419666 - 01/06/20 05:05 PM (4 years, 23 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
qman said: It's up to Pelosi at this point, so your frustration should be with her and not the current process.
So what do you think is delaying the trial?
She's trying to influence the Senate trial in that she wants there to be a real one. The senate has dug in it's heels and won't promise to hold a real trial. The senate leader decided the outcome weeks ago.
As far as I know, the senate is perfectly allowed to hold a kangaroo court. Likewise, as far as I know the house of reps is fully allowed to hold a kangaroo impeachment. That's what sole power means, to me. The process in both houses is not clearly and precisely defined so I guess it's what ever the house says it is.
I hope Im missing something, something that would make it the case that the houses had to hold credible proceedings.
The one redeeming factor in all this is democracy. The people should be able to decide if they want a bunch of grifters in their houses of congress, and who the grifters are. It ain't much but that's the situation.
I have no doubt that the house of reps credibly demonstrated abuses of power enough that charges are warranted. The ambassador testified Trump was tying White House visit to the Biden investigation, which he was attempting to surreptitiously initiate, furthermore, the ambassador believed the president tied the military aid to the investigations. That's some seriously fucked up shit, military aid was indeed being withheld contrary to United States policy. Very suspicious. What else could prez decide to alter according to his whims rather than the workings of his government?
When the government decides to do something, it's not cool to have some rogue agent hijack it for their personal games.
The senate is clearly not willing to credibly deal with these charges.
The people will decide who will lead them into the future.
The people picked Barabus too, since the Trump impeachment gets comparisons with the Jesus trial. The people were incited by the pharisees to make Jesus sound offensive to their religion and picked Barabus in a fit of passion.
I guess maybe it is somewhat comparable, if you shift the characters around.
Edited by JohnRainy (01/06/20 05:11 PM)
|
qman
Stranger

Registered: 12/06/06
Posts: 34,927
Last seen: 1 day, 8 hours
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: JohnRainy] 1
#26419705 - 01/06/20 05:27 PM (4 years, 23 days ago) |
|
|
The Senate will deal with the charges IF Pelosi decides to proceed.
Maybe Pelosi is deliberately sabotaging the process because it was political stunt from the very beginning. If someone believes they have the evidence, they want their day in court ASAP. Obviously, that isn't the case today.
|
JohnRainy
Stranger

Registered: 07/09/19
Posts: 1,244
Last seen: 3 years, 11 months
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: qman]
#26419734 - 01/06/20 05:46 PM (4 years, 23 days ago) |
|
|
There're not going to get their day in court. The outcome was decided before the trial even began.
On what grounds do you claim the impeachment was merely a political ploy?
|
Kwyjibo
Stranger

Registered: 07/31/18
Posts: 1,261
Loc: California
Last seen: 1 hour, 11 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: qman]
#26419905 - 01/06/20 07:37 PM (4 years, 22 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
qman said:
Maybe Pelosi is deliberately sabotaging the process because it was political stunt from the very beginning. If someone believes they have the evidence, they want their day in court ASAP. Obviously, that isn't the case today.
It's definitely not because one of the jurors has said they will be working closely with the accused and another is on record saying that they won't be an impartial juror.
|
Metoo
Stranger


Registered: 10/13/18
Posts: 1,524
Last seen: 2 hours, 43 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: JohnRainy] 2
#26420456 - 01/07/20 06:38 AM (4 years, 22 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
JohnRainy said: There're not going to get their day in court. The outcome was decided before the trial even began.
On what grounds do you claim the impeachment was merely a political ploy?
Correct, the outcome was already decided and well known to everyone when Pelosi got mobbed by the left wing of her party to initiate the process without bipartisan support - the House was always going to impeach and the Senate to acquit. Because the outcome was pre-determined the Dems objective was not to get rid of Trump but rather to embarrass and weaken him - a purely partisan, political ploy.
|
JohnRainy
Stranger

Registered: 07/09/19
Posts: 1,244
Last seen: 3 years, 11 months
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Metoo] 1
#26423707 - 01/08/20 10:11 PM (4 years, 20 days ago) |
|
|
I thought it was because there was evidence he was abusing his power. The House of Reps made a case demonstrating that. The ambassador testified that Trump tied a White House visit to the infamous investigation he was inappropriately trying to trigger, and that he believed the military aid was conditioned that way as well. Furthermore, the White House obstructed the investigation and ignored subpoenas.
Why do you never address the facts of the case but always just say what republicans say, that it's only because the dems are out to get him?
It's really weird. You'd make a good senator.
The Senate is not going to demonstrate any innocence regarding these charges. No witnesses. Just a kangaroo court. If Trump is innocent, it would be most powerful to have the witnesses come and testify to that fact. Instead of doing that, they are not going to address any of the charges substantively, just say he's innocent, just say it's a witch-hunt, and there will be people who repeat it.
I guess they figure that's a better out than changing the rules and dismissing the whole thing.\
McConnell Says He Will Proceed on Impeachment Trial Without Witness Deal
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 21 days
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: JohnRainy]
#26423731 - 01/08/20 10:29 PM (4 years, 20 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
JohnRainy said: The ambassador testified that Trump tied a White House visit to the infamous investigation he was inappropriately trying to trigger...
I'm not saying the investigation wasn't political, but Biden certainly appears corrupt. Is a president not allowed to go after corruption? I don't know.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,049
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 4 hours, 7 minutes
|
|
Politicians with executive authority should be completely hands off any investigation where they have conflicts of interest. They really should be hands off any investigation. This should be a no brainer. You take it to the justice department or DA, and then you stay out of it.
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 21 days
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: koods]
#26423761 - 01/08/20 11:07 PM (4 years, 20 days ago) |
|
|
That would be ideal. But they won't go after an establishment politician who's currently the democratic front runner. They'd go after Sanders (if he were corrupt).
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,049
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 4 hours, 7 minutes
|
|
That claim is demonstrably false. The last democratic nominee was under investigation for most of the time she was running. Actually, both candidates were under investigation in 2016, but the FBI denied Trump was under investigation, while FBI agents were leaking stories to Rudy Guiliani about Hillary.
If the president doesn’t think his justice department is willing to do its job, then he needs to fix that problem, not freelance investigations to private lawyers and foreign countries.
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
Edited by koods (01/08/20 11:31 PM)
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 21 days
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: koods]
#26423773 - 01/08/20 11:28 PM (4 years, 20 days ago) |
|
|
They weren't going to find anything on Hillary - she was the establishment's leading contender at the time.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
JohnRainy
Stranger

Registered: 07/09/19
Posts: 1,244
Last seen: 3 years, 11 months
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
JohnRainy said: The ambassador testified that Trump tied a White House visit to the infamous investigation he was inappropriately trying to trigger...
I'm not saying the investigation wasn't political, but Biden certainly appears corrupt. Is a president not allowed to go after corruption? I don't know.
Not in the way he did it. He surreptitiously pursued it in a personal way, using his position as president as leverage, and it was against a political opponent! Heads of state are supposed to avoid even the appearance of conflict of interest.
If the president was concerned about corruption, he could have publicly said so and followed the norms of such a pursuit. He did this secretly.
The freaking pentagon didn't know what the hell was going on with the aid! You don't not keep your military in the loop.
He could have easily said he's concerned about giving aid to Ukraine because of the corruption he suspects. And what was with the demand for a press conference announcing it? You don't need that to do an investigation.
Biden can be as corrupt as the day is long and it doesn't take away from what Trump did. They are both likely scumbags who deserve to be scrutinized and held to account. Like that will ever happen.
Trump says some distracting thing and I hear people start talking about it. I don't know why. If Biden leveraged Burisma to give his brat kid a fake job, that doesn't make what Trump did OK, and he's the one who is president and should be going down now. If Biden did something wrong, he should be held accountable too.
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,049
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 4 hours, 7 minutes
|
|
Dude come on. Hillary Clinton is one of the most investigated people on earth. There has been no reluctance to investigate her. Manufacturing Clinton investigations was an electoral strategy pursued by the GOP Congress for a half decade before the 2016 election .
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 21 days
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: JohnRainy]
#26423783 - 01/08/20 11:41 PM (4 years, 20 days ago) |
|
|
Agreed.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Metoo
Stranger


Registered: 10/13/18
Posts: 1,524
Last seen: 2 hours, 43 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: JohnRainy] 1
#26423800 - 01/09/20 12:07 AM (4 years, 20 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
JohnRainy said: Why do you never address the facts of the case but always just say what republicans say, that it's only because the dems are out to get him?
This thread is focused on the constitutionality of the Dems effort to impeach Trump through a partisan motion (I should know - I have started it). From this angle the strength of evidence against him is irrelevant beyond a trivial observation it was not sufficient to convince a single Republican to support the impeachment push.
On the Trump 2020 thread which focuses on the next election I extensively discussed the merits of the abuse of power allegations against Trump. On 27/12 I even asked you, JohnRainy, some direct questions about the role of Bidens in the whole saga but, unless I missed your answers, you have ignored me
Edited by Metoo (01/09/20 12:19 AM)
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,049
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 4 hours, 7 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Metoo]
#26423804 - 01/09/20 12:30 AM (4 years, 20 days ago) |
|
|
Except there is no requirement that impeachment be bipartisan. The entire question if an impeachment is unconstitutional is meaningless anyways since impeachment is not subject to judicial review.
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
Metoo
Stranger


Registered: 10/13/18
Posts: 1,524
Last seen: 2 hours, 43 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: koods]
#26423806 - 01/09/20 12:34 AM (4 years, 20 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
koods said: Except there is no requirement that impeachment be bipartisan. The entire question if an impeachment is unconstitutional is meaningless anyways since impeachment is not subject to judicial review.
If you are considering the topic of this thread meaningless feel free to move on
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,049
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 4 hours, 7 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Metoo]
#26423814 - 01/09/20 12:47 AM (4 years, 20 days ago) |
|
|
What I’m saying is, in practice, there is no such thing as an unconstitutional impeachment. Impeachment powers are completely reserved for the house and senate.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nixon_v._United_States
Quote:
The court's decision was unanimous, but four separate opinions were published. The majority opinion, by Chief Justice William Rehnquist, held that the courts may not review the impeachment and trial of a federal officer because the Constitution reserves that function to a coordinate political branch. Article I, Section 3 of the Constitution gives the Senate the "sole power to try all impeachments." Because of the word sole it is clear that the judicial branch was not to be included. Furthermore, because the word try was originally understood to include factfinding committees, there was a textually demonstrable commitment to give broad discretion to the Senate in impeachments.
Furthermore the Framers believed that representatives of the people should try impeachments, and the Court was too small to justly try impeachments. Also, the judicial branch is "checked" by impeachments, so judicial involvement in impeachments might violate the doctrine of the separation of powers.
The Court further ruled that involving the judiciary would prevent finality without clear remedy and bias post-impeachment criminal or civil prosecutions, which the Constitution explicitly allows.
Edited by koods (01/09/20 12:52 AM)
|
Tantrika
Miss Ann Thrope




Registered: 03/26/12
Posts: 17,138
Loc: Lashed to the pyre
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
JohnRainy said: The ambassador testified that Trump tied a White House visit to the infamous investigation he was inappropriately trying to trigger...
I'm not saying the investigation wasn't political, but Biden certainly appears corrupt. Is a president not allowed to go after corruption? I don't know.
Do not doubt that Biden is corrupt and/or was corrupt in the Obama administration but does he actually hold any sort of political office anymore, or has this been pursuit of a US citizen for corruption?
Do not expect him to get elected, so what is it that he is corrupting at this point?
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,495
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Metoo] 3
#26424071 - 01/09/20 07:27 AM (4 years, 20 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Metoo said:
Quote:
koods said: Except there is no requirement that impeachment be bipartisan. The entire question if an impeachment is unconstitutional is meaningless anyways since impeachment is not subject to judicial review.
If you are considering the topic of this thread meaningless feel free to move on
He's not saying it's meaningless. He's challenging the validity of your argument by attacking the premise. Your premise is incorrect.
Assuming it was 100% partisan, that would not make it unconstitutional in any way. You've yet to provide any authority whatsoever for the notion that the constitution requires bipartisanship for any purpose whatsoever.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 21 days
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Tantrika] 1
#26424388 - 01/09/20 10:58 AM (4 years, 20 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Tantrika said: Do not doubt that Biden is corrupt and/or was corrupt in the Obama administration but does he actually hold any sort of political office anymore, or has this been pursuit of a US citizen for corruption?
Do not expect him to get elected, so what is it that he is corrupting at this point?
His corruption was using his office for personal gain.
People should know about that if he's running for President, and he's currently the leading Demcratic candidate.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Metoo
Stranger


Registered: 10/13/18
Posts: 1,524
Last seen: 2 hours, 43 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Enlil]
#26424517 - 01/09/20 12:03 PM (4 years, 20 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said:
Quote:
Metoo said:
Quote:
koods said: Except there is no requirement that impeachment be bipartisan. The entire question if an impeachment is unconstitutional is meaningless anyways since impeachment is not subject to judicial review.
If you are considering the topic of this thread meaningless feel free to move on
He's not saying it's meaningless. He's challenging the validity of your argument by attacking the premise.
No. He said: "The entire question if an impeachment is unconstitutional is meaningless..." which challenges the relevance of the thread dedicated to assessing whether the Dems have abused their power by pursuing bipartisan impeachment.
Quote:
Enlil said: Your premise is incorrect.
Assuming it was 100% partisan, that would not make it unconstitutional in any way. You've yet to provide any authority whatsoever for the notion that the constitution requires bipartisanship for any purpose whatsoever.
The thread contributors have expressed a range of opinions on this and you are entitled to yours
|
Psilynut2
Stranger

Registered: 04/28/17
Posts: 5,120
Last seen: 9 hours, 13 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Metoo] 3
#26424582 - 01/09/20 12:33 PM (4 years, 20 days ago) |
|
|
Can you you quote the part of the constitution that requires the impeachment process to be a partisan process ? If not what he said isn’t an opinion , it’s a just fact you can’t dispute, and that makes this thread 10 pages of irrelevant bullshit .
Edited by Psilynut2 (01/09/20 12:40 PM)
|
Metoo
Stranger


Registered: 10/13/18
Posts: 1,524
Last seen: 2 hours, 43 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Psilynut2]
#26424596 - 01/09/20 12:41 PM (4 years, 20 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Psilynut2 said: Can you you quote the part of the constitution that requires the impeachment process to be a partisan process ? If not what he said isn’t an opinion , it’s a just fact you can’t dispute.
Please follow the discussion on the first few pages of this thread - you will find both personal opinions and links to articles written by lawyers, invoking the Federalist Papers as well as direct quotes from Alexander Hamilton.
No problem, pleased to be able to help :-).
|
Psilynut2
Stranger

Registered: 04/28/17
Posts: 5,120
Last seen: 9 hours, 13 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Metoo]
#26424604 - 01/09/20 12:44 PM (4 years, 20 days ago) |
|
|
Are you going to quote the part of the constitution or not ? Should be easy .
|
Metoo
Stranger


Registered: 10/13/18
Posts: 1,524
Last seen: 2 hours, 43 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Psilynut2] 1
#26424653 - 01/09/20 01:08 PM (4 years, 20 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Psilynut2 said: Are you going to quote the part of the constitution or not ? Should be easy .
Please put some effort into reviewing what has already been posted on this thread. It should sharpen your critical thinking so you are able to ask some more nuanced questions and not just one-liners.
|
Psilynut2
Stranger

Registered: 04/28/17
Posts: 5,120
Last seen: 9 hours, 13 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Metoo]
#26424665 - 01/09/20 01:13 PM (4 years, 20 days ago) |
|
|
I have , did someone else quote that part of the constitution ? Did I miss it ? It’s really the only relevant question here . It either says it or it doesn’t . Some guy saying I think it should be this way is meaningless . When someone gives you their opinion about the 2nd do you just agree or do you say where in the hell does it say that whats so hard to understand about shall not be infringed ?
Edited by Psilynut2 (01/09/20 01:18 PM)
|
Metoo
Stranger


Registered: 10/13/18
Posts: 1,524
Last seen: 2 hours, 43 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Psilynut2]
#26424688 - 01/09/20 01:23 PM (4 years, 20 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Psilynut2 said: I have , did someone else quote that part of the constitution ? Did I miss it ? It’s really the only relevant question here . It either says it or it doesn’t . Some guy saying I think it should be this way is meaningless . When someone gives you their opinion about the 2nd do you just agree or do you say we’re in the hell does it say that what so hard to understand about shall not be infringed ?
Various contributors quoted from the Federalist Papers and directly Alexander Hamilton. Two of the linked articles written by lawyers claimed that, in the dynamic balance of power between the branches, the Fathers specifically did not allow for Presidents to be removed through an impeachment motion orchestrated by the opposition party contemporaneously holding numeric advantage in the House.
I do not understand the last sentence in your post above - please re-phrase.
Edited by Metoo (01/09/20 01:39 PM)
|
Psilynut2
Stranger

Registered: 04/28/17
Posts: 5,120
Last seen: 9 hours, 13 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Metoo]
#26424726 - 01/09/20 01:47 PM (4 years, 20 days ago) |
|
|
Does the exact wording of the second amendment matter to you?
|
Metoo
Stranger


Registered: 10/13/18
Posts: 1,524
Last seen: 2 hours, 43 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Psilynut2]
#26424744 - 01/09/20 01:54 PM (4 years, 20 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Psilynut2 said: Does the exact wording of the second amendment matter to you?
Yes
|
Psilynut2
Stranger

Registered: 04/28/17
Posts: 5,120
Last seen: 9 hours, 13 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Metoo]
#26424815 - 01/09/20 02:19 PM (4 years, 20 days ago) |
|
|
Then why don’t you care about the exact words relating to impeachment . There nothing that says the opposing party has to like it .
|
Metoo
Stranger


Registered: 10/13/18
Posts: 1,524
Last seen: 2 hours, 43 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Psilynut2]
#26424848 - 01/09/20 02:39 PM (4 years, 20 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Psilynut2 said: Then why don’t you care about the exact words relating to impeachment . There nothing that says the opposing party has to like it .
I do - along with the historical context like other writings of the Fathers etc. This is what helps establish the intent of any document.
I have answered a few of your questions so here is one for you. Where is the Constitution does it say that "abuse of power" or "obstruction of congress" are impeachable offenses? Please provide direct quotes featuring these exact terms in your response.
|
feldman114
Stragler


Registered: 09/06/19
Posts: 3,365
Loc: Bravos
Last seen: 3 years, 9 months
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Metoo]
#26424874 - 01/09/20 02:56 PM (4 years, 20 days ago) |
|
|
I mean it says “high crimes and misdemeanors” which is really vague, so it’s hard to argue the wording doesn’t include one crime or another...
|
ballsalsa
Universally Loathed and Reviled



Registered: 03/11/15
Posts: 20,837
Loc: Foreign Lands
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Metoo]
#26424896 - 01/09/20 03:06 PM (4 years, 20 days ago) |
|
|
There weren't parties yet at that time although ideological factions existed
--------------------
Like cannabis topics? Read my cannabis blog here
|
Metoo
Stranger


Registered: 10/13/18
Posts: 1,524
Last seen: 2 hours, 43 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: feldman114]
#26424903 - 01/09/20 03:09 PM (4 years, 20 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
feldman114 said: I mean it says “high crimes and misdemeanors” which is really vague, so it’s hard to argue the wording doesn’t include one crime or another...
I agree that an argument along these lines can be mounted - largely based on the analysis of the legal meaning of language, historical context and other writings of the Fathers but Psilynut2 expected me to produce a direct quote from the Constitution in support of a claim that impeachment should be bipartisan so let's see what he can come up with here...
Edited by Metoo (01/09/20 06:50 PM)
|
Psilynut2
Stranger

Registered: 04/28/17
Posts: 5,120
Last seen: 9 hours, 13 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Metoo]
#26424970 - 01/09/20 03:56 PM (4 years, 20 days ago) |
|
|
Andrew Johnson was impeached and almost removed for firing his war secretary. He needed approval from congress to do it . He was 1 vote away from being removed in his senate trial . Did the radical republicans at the time abuse their power for doing this to him?
|
Metoo
Stranger


Registered: 10/13/18
Posts: 1,524
Last seen: 2 hours, 43 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Psilynut2]
#26424976 - 01/09/20 04:00 PM (4 years, 20 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Psilynut2 said: Andrew Johnson was impeached and almost removed for firing his war secretary. He needed approval from congress to do it . He was 1 vote away from being removed in his senate trial . Did the radical republicans at the time abuse their power for doing this to him?
I have already answered a number of your questions so please do me a favour and offer your response to this one:
Where in the Constitution does it say that "abuse of power" or "obstruction of congress" are impeachable offenses? Please provide direct quotes featuring these exact terms in your response.
Edited by Metoo (01/09/20 04:03 PM)
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,049
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 4 hours, 7 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Metoo] 1
#26424989 - 01/09/20 04:10 PM (4 years, 20 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Metoo said:
Quote:
Psilynut2 said: Then why don’t you care about the exact words relating to impeachment . There nothing that says the opposing party has to like it .
I do - along with the historical context like other writings of the Fathers etc. This is what helps establish the intent of any document.
I have answered a few of your questions so here is one for you. Where is the Constitution does it say that "abuse of power" or "obstruction of congress" are impeachable offenses? Please provide direct quotes featuring these exact terms in your response.
Misdemeanor means bad behavior.
The house gets to say what is an impeachable offense
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
Psilynut2
Stranger

Registered: 04/28/17
Posts: 5,120
Last seen: 9 hours, 13 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Metoo]
#26425005 - 01/09/20 04:19 PM (4 years, 20 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Where in the Constitution does it say that "abuse of power" or "obstruction of congress" are impeachable offenses? Please provide direct quotes featuring these exact terms in your response.
“””
Edit Abuse of power or abuse of authority, in the form of "malfeasance in office" or "official misconduct", is the commission of an unlawful act, done in an official capacity, “””
Or a misdemeanor .
“” Obstruction of justice, in United States jurisdictions, is a crime consisting of obstructing prosecutors, investigators, or other government officials. Common law jurisdictions other than the United States tend to use the wider offense of perverting the course of justice.””
Obstruction of congress is simply obstruction of justice . A serious crime .
Do you think there’s room on the constitution to list every possible crime ? No thats why they put high crimes and misdemeanors. That’s a really stupid question .
Edited by Psilynut2 (01/09/20 05:55 PM)
|
Metoo
Stranger


Registered: 10/13/18
Posts: 1,524
Last seen: 2 hours, 43 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Psilynut2]
#26425030 - 01/09/20 04:32 PM (4 years, 20 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Psilynut2 said:
Quote:
Where in the Constitution does it say that "abuse of power" or "obstruction of congress" are impeachable offenses? Please provide direct quotes featuring these exact terms in your response.
“””
Edit Abuse of power or abuse of authority, in the form of "malfeasance in office" or "official misconduct", is the commission of an unlawful act, done in an official capacity, “””
Or a misdemeanor .
“” Obstruction of justice, in United States jurisdictions, is a crime consisting of obstructing prosecutors, investigators, or other government officials. Common law jurisdictions other than the United States tend to use the wider offense of perverting the course of justice.””
Obstruction of congress is simply obstruction of justice . A serious crime .
Do you think there’s room on the constitution to list every possible crime ? No that why they put high crimes and misdemeanors. That’s a really stupid question .
Can you quote the part of the constitution that lists "abuse of power" and "obstruction of congress" as impeachable crimes? If not what you said is just an opinion and that makes your posts irrelevant bullshit.
Edited by Metoo (01/09/20 04:33 PM)
|
JohnRainy
Stranger

Registered: 07/09/19
Posts: 1,244
Last seen: 3 years, 11 months
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Metoo] 1
#26425083 - 01/09/20 05:03 PM (4 years, 20 days ago) |
|
|
Article I, Section 2, Clause 5 provides: The House of Representatives shall choose their Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment. ...
That gives the house of reps authority to impeach on what it perceives to be high crimes and misdemeanours, as the constitution broadly defines it.
Within the above concept, abuse of power and obstruction of congress are valid charges.
What is the point of wanting it to say abuse of power and obstruction of congress specifically? We all know it that doesn't. Does that prove something?
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,049
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 4 hours, 7 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: JohnRainy] 3
#26425088 - 01/09/20 05:07 PM (4 years, 20 days ago) |
|
|
You don’t need a crime to be impeached. It’s not a criminal proceeding. It’s a political one.
What if the president just stopped working and he sleeps most days and plays video games. He hasn’t been to the office in two months. He won’t sign bills.
None of these things are crimes, but anyone can recognize that he should be impeached.
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
Edited by koods (01/09/20 05:09 PM)
|
ballsalsa
Universally Loathed and Reviled



Registered: 03/11/15
Posts: 20,837
Loc: Foreign Lands
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: koods] 1
#26425187 - 01/09/20 06:12 PM (4 years, 20 days ago) |
|
|
You already said the whole deal. Misdemeanor means bad behavior, as it did in english common law before the constitution was written. Examples of misdemeanors that people have historically been impeached for include failure to spend lawfully appropriated funds.
Obviously bad behavior can be defined in the moment amd doesn't rely solely on precedence.
Also obviously, the lack of existing parties at the time of the constitutional convention precludes any constitutional mandate for bi, tri, or poly-partisan consensus
--------------------
Like cannabis topics? Read my cannabis blog here
|
Metoo
Stranger


Registered: 10/13/18
Posts: 1,524
Last seen: 2 hours, 43 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: JohnRainy]
#26425329 - 01/09/20 07:46 PM (4 years, 19 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
JohnRainy said: Article I, Section 2, Clause 5 provides: The House of Representatives shall choose their Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment. ...
That gives the house of reps authority to impeach on what it perceives to be high crimes and misdemeanours, as the constitution broadly defines it.
Within the above concept, abuse of power and obstruction of congress are valid charges.
What is the point of wanting it to say abuse of power and obstruction of congress specifically? We all know it that doesn't. Does that prove something?
It depends. Psilynut2 insisted that I produced a direct, literary quote from the Constitution in support of my claim that the Fathers envisaged impeachment to be a bipartisan process or else this thread is "irrelevant bullshit". In the discussion I never put quotation marks around bipartisan because it is not a direct quote from the Constitution but rather what I believe to be the best contemporary term embodying the intent of the Fathers. Just like the Constitution never used the term "abuse of power" it also never used "bipartisan" - in both cases we have to interpret the intent of the Fathers in the contemporary framework to establish what the text prescribes for the situation at hand.
I posit that the intent was not to initiate impeachment unless the case had universal support, beyond the political fractures, at the risk of the vote becoming a Presidential support poll in the Congress:
"In many cases it will connect itself with the pre-existing factions, and will enlist all their animosities, partialities, influence, and interest on one side or on the other; and in such cases there will always be the greatest danger that the decision will be regulated more by the comparative strength of parties, than by the real demonstrations of innocence or guilt." (Hamilton)
In the current two-party system non-political effectively means bipartisan and this is the term I used, as best representing the spirit of the above text. Pelosi agreed (before being mobbed by her caucus):
“Unless there’s something so compelling and overwhelming and bipartisan, I don’t think we should go down that path, because it divides the country”
As I twice pointed out to Psilynut2, two lawyers went on public record in support of this very interpretation of the Constitution which adds weight to my claims. All this fell on deaf ears and Psilynut2 was only interested in whether the word "bipartisan" is in the Constitution so I asked him to reflect if the articles of impeachment themselves have a literary support in the text (they do not).
Edited by Metoo (01/09/20 08:14 PM)
|
JohnRainy
Stranger

Registered: 07/09/19
Posts: 1,244
Last seen: 3 years, 11 months
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Metoo]
#26425387 - 01/09/20 08:31 PM (4 years, 19 days ago) |
|
|
If the founding fathers were so adamant that an impeachment should be bipartisan, why didn't they say a vote to impeach should include representation from all parties that may form along these pre-existing factions Alex Ham spoke about? Even he didn't say that it should and he was considering these things and supposedly is a man who knew what he was talking about.
The constitution gives the houses of reps broad powers of impeachment for high crimes and misdemeanours. That addresses abuse of power and obstruction of congress in a way that's just because it's left open. There is nothing anywhere that addresses this bipartisan requirement you keep thinking should exist.
Nancy Pelosi can have her thoughts and GWB era cretins will likely be crawling out from behind the fridge saying all kinds of crazy things for years to come too, if these lawyers are who I think you're talking about.
|
Metoo
Stranger


Registered: 10/13/18
Posts: 1,524
Last seen: 2 hours, 43 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: JohnRainy]
#26425420 - 01/09/20 08:55 PM (4 years, 19 days ago) |
|
|
Ha - exactly what I have been wondering about. Then I took it a step further and tried to write a legal clause which would encapsulate what we are discussing and failed! Whatever I came up with either was not general enough or could be too restrictive in some situations. Your attempt would fail in the current balance of power if both major parties agreed to impeach but Trump managed to bribe one of the independents into starting a party and opposing the motion.
So my current theory is that Hamilton found the best available solution - put extensive reasoning behind the brief mention of impeachment in the Constitution in the Papers. Please note that this issue is not incidental or of only oblique relevance - he is running a detailed and extensive analysis of the balance of power between the branches, explaining why alternatives to his preferred model are inferior. The guy was not dumb!
Edited by Metoo (01/09/20 09:09 PM)
|
ballsalsa
Universally Loathed and Reviled



Registered: 03/11/15
Posts: 20,837
Loc: Foreign Lands
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Metoo]
#26425456 - 01/09/20 09:15 PM (4 years, 19 days ago) |
|
|
Yeah, this isn't the United States of Hamilton. A few other guys were in on the deal
--------------------
Like cannabis topics? Read my cannabis blog here
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,049
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 4 hours, 7 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: ballsalsa] 1
#26425679 - 01/09/20 11:57 PM (4 years, 19 days ago) |
|
|
Hamilton was a terrible President. I liked Franklin better.
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
Brian Jones
Club 27



Registered: 12/18/12
Posts: 12,340
Loc: attending Snake Church
Last seen: 3 hours, 30 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: koods]
#26426076 - 01/10/20 06:51 AM (4 years, 19 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
koods said: Hamilton was a terrible President. I liked Franklin better.
They were the two best Presidents ever. How else could they get their face on money.
-------------------- "The Rolling Stones will break up over Brian Jones' dead body" John Lennon I don't want no commies in my car. No Christians either. The worst thing about corruption is that it works so well,
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,495
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Brian Jones]
#26426103 - 01/10/20 07:28 AM (4 years, 19 days ago) |
|
|
Hamilton wasn't a President, so Franklin would have to have been a better President by definition.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Brian Jones
Club 27



Registered: 12/18/12
Posts: 12,340
Loc: attending Snake Church
Last seen: 3 hours, 30 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Enlil]
#26426110 - 01/10/20 07:37 AM (4 years, 19 days ago) |
|
|
I was going on my impression that they both were not Presidents. And I wanted to make fun of anyone who thought differently, cause that's what I do.
-------------------- "The Rolling Stones will break up over Brian Jones' dead body" John Lennon I don't want no commies in my car. No Christians either. The worst thing about corruption is that it works so well,
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,495
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Brian Jones]
#26426113 - 01/10/20 07:39 AM (4 years, 19 days ago) |
|
|
Then I'll make fun of you for not knowing that Benjamin Franklin was President of Pennsylvania.
NOOB.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Brian Jones
Club 27



Registered: 12/18/12
Posts: 12,340
Loc: attending Snake Church
Last seen: 3 hours, 30 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Enlil]
#26426119 - 01/10/20 07:46 AM (4 years, 19 days ago) |
|
|
And here I thought William Penn was the President. Franklin was my favorite postmaster though.
-------------------- "The Rolling Stones will break up over Brian Jones' dead body" John Lennon I don't want no commies in my car. No Christians either. The worst thing about corruption is that it works so well,
|
feldman114
Stragler


Registered: 09/06/19
Posts: 3,365
Loc: Bravos
Last seen: 3 years, 9 months
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Brian Jones]
#26426125 - 01/10/20 07:53 AM (4 years, 19 days ago) |
|
|
Didn’t Franklin steal other people’s inventions?
I really don’t know how the founding fathers are still praised in the US. They were a bunch of racists with a handful of good ideas that they stole from the French!
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,495
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: feldman114]
#26426128 - 01/10/20 07:56 AM (4 years, 19 days ago) |
|
|
I don't think they're praised, per se. They did accomplish something extraordinary, but it's pretty widely accepted that the time and circumstances had more to do with that than any anything else.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
relic
of a bygone era


Registered: 10/14/14
Posts: 5,623
Loc: the right coast
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Enlil]
#26426162 - 01/10/20 08:26 AM (4 years, 19 days ago) |
|
|
By and large the right wing in the US puts the founding fathers on a pedestal as if they were the crowning achievement of humanity to that point. As such, a pretty good argument can be made for 'praise of the founding fathers', IMO.
Aside: the founding fathers moniker is cringey af. Dont know why, just is. And I dont have father issues; my dad was one of the best that ever lived.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,495
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: relic]
#26426175 - 01/10/20 08:37 AM (4 years, 19 days ago) |
|
|
The left wing puts Chomsky on a pedestal. Extremists take extreme positions. I don't see much value in analyzing the extremes.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
christopera
Stranger


Registered: 10/13/17
Posts: 14,201
Last seen: 5 minutes, 55 seconds
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: relic]
#26426180 - 01/10/20 08:42 AM (4 years, 19 days ago) |
|
|
It's damn near a religion. A lot on the right have made up all sorts of folklore and mythologies surrounding the founding fathers. The second amendment is a prime example.
-------------------- Enjoy the process of your search without succumbing to the pressure of the result. A Dorito is pizza, change my mind. Bank and Union with The Shroomery at the Zuul on The internet - now with %'s and things I’m sorry it had to be me.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,495
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: christopera]
#26426183 - 01/10/20 08:46 AM (4 years, 19 days ago) |
|
|
That's not just the right, though. That's humans. Idiocy seems to be pretty evenly distributed throughout the political spectrum.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
feldman114
Stragler


Registered: 09/06/19
Posts: 3,365
Loc: Bravos
Last seen: 3 years, 9 months
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Enlil]
#26426193 - 01/10/20 08:54 AM (4 years, 19 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said: That's not just the right, though. That's humans. Idiocy seems to be pretty evenly distributed throughout the political spectrum.
If viewed as a spectrum, sure. But divided into 2 parties? The right soo takes the cake.
Don’t get me wrong, Places like the Huff Post are full of left-wing bias. Cringeworthy more often than not. But even the huff post has nothing on FOX, amiright? Not even close🤷🏻♂️
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,495
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: feldman114] 2
#26426195 - 01/10/20 09:01 AM (4 years, 19 days ago) |
|
|
I disagree. Maybe you see more idiocy on the right because you're on the left...
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
feldman114
Stragler


Registered: 09/06/19
Posts: 3,365
Loc: Bravos
Last seen: 3 years, 9 months
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Enlil]
#26426219 - 01/10/20 09:20 AM (4 years, 19 days ago) |
|
|
I concede that, it would make sense.
But, just for laughs, i went to both sites. Here are the current top stories:

As you can see, the huff post is cringe. “Trump defends killing...” - obv biased view. “Collateral damage” - putting words in Republican mouths...
Buuuut... Fox headlines are just crazy IMO. How in the fuck are people still on Bengazi? “Democrats fume at Deadbeat Cortez” - cmon now. And the way they lure people with shocking clickbait that has nothing to do with politics...
|
christopera
Stranger


Registered: 10/13/17
Posts: 14,201
Last seen: 5 minutes, 55 seconds
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: feldman114]
#26426258 - 01/10/20 09:59 AM (4 years, 19 days ago) |
|
|
Somebody do a quantitative study of the language used on the various news websites. Could be an interesting insight into the reading characters of the various demographics.
-------------------- Enjoy the process of your search without succumbing to the pressure of the result. A Dorito is pizza, change my mind. Bank and Union with The Shroomery at the Zuul on The internet - now with %'s and things I’m sorry it had to be me.
|
Brian Jones
Club 27



Registered: 12/18/12
Posts: 12,340
Loc: attending Snake Church
Last seen: 3 hours, 30 minutes
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: feldman114] 4
#26426553 - 01/10/20 01:23 PM (4 years, 19 days ago) |
|
|
AOC is my new hero. Bernie is great but at his age he isn't going to be around too long. AOC will be the front person for the progressive movement for a zillion years.
On this left-right issue, I don't recall the center being worth much to this country in the last 6 decades. They have offered little resistance to continuous wars, ever increasing inequality and destroying the environment.
-------------------- "The Rolling Stones will break up over Brian Jones' dead body" John Lennon I don't want no commies in my car. No Christians either. The worst thing about corruption is that it works so well,
|
relic
of a bygone era


Registered: 10/14/14
Posts: 5,623
Loc: the right coast
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: Enlil] 2
#26427112 - 01/10/20 06:58 PM (4 years, 19 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said: The left wing puts Chomsky on a pedestal
If you say so. I've never heard the name mentioned on any of the left biased news channels and cant remember anyone here mentioning it more than once, perhaps twice. That's not saying I know for a fact that chomsky hasn't been mentioned more, I just dont recall it. OTOH, mentions of the founding cringefathers seem much more prevalent on both fox and POL forums I read. 
Quote:
Enlil said: I don't see much value in analyzing the extremes.
I do. I very much like to analyze and know the extremes since the most dangerous humans--and many of my enemies--often occupy those extremes.
|
SirTripAlot
Semper Fidelis



Registered: 01/11/05
Posts: 7,459
Loc: Harmless (Mostly)
Last seen: 23 seconds
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: relic] 2
#26427272 - 01/10/20 08:51 PM (4 years, 18 days ago) |
|
|
I have heard Chomsky, ad nauseam in alot of left wing circles. I do agree the right tends to superhero the founding fathers more. Its a shame, as it is an incomplete narrative (like the founding fathers distrust/fear of corporations).
-------------------- “I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me. And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path. Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain.”
|
christopera
Stranger


Registered: 10/13/17
Posts: 14,201
Last seen: 5 minutes, 55 seconds
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: SirTripAlot] 1
#26427277 - 01/10/20 09:01 PM (4 years, 18 days ago) |
|
|
Chomsky's quantitative stuff is solid, but there are legitimate critiques. The critiques aren't nearly as easy as those for the founding father worship though.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
-------------------- Enjoy the process of your search without succumbing to the pressure of the result. A Dorito is pizza, change my mind. Bank and Union with The Shroomery at the Zuul on The internet - now with %'s and things I’m sorry it had to be me.
|
starfire_xes
I Am 'They'



Registered: 10/24/09
Posts: 21,590
Loc: Dallas with all the assho...
Last seen: 7 months, 1 day
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: christopera]
#26429541 - 01/12/20 11:28 AM (4 years, 17 days ago) |
|
|
Chomsky was a linguistic. Why want anyone would listen to him?
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 21 days
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: starfire_xes]
#26429582 - 01/12/20 12:03 PM (4 years, 17 days ago) |
|
|
Many Congressmen are lawyers. Why would anyone want to listen to them?
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Bigbadwooof
Trumps Bone Spurs



Registered: 12/07/13
Posts: 13,318
Last seen: 29 minutes, 13 seconds
|
Re: The abuse of power which led to impeachment [Re: starfire_xes] 4
#26429644 - 01/12/20 12:59 PM (4 years, 17 days ago) |
|
|
Quote:
starfire_xes said: Chomsky was a linguistic. Why want anyone would listen to him?
You're clearly not a 'linguistic'...
I think I'd rather listen to chomsky.
Trump was a businessman... Why would anyone want to listen to what he has to say about politics?
-------------------- "It is no measure of good health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society," - Jiddu Krishnamurti FARTS "There is no need for conspiracy where interests converge" - George Carlin Every one of you should see this video. "If you bombard the earth with photons for a while, it can emit a roadster" - Andrej Kerpathy
 
|
|