Forum Thread

Senate Impeachment Trial

Reply to ThreadDisplaying 31 - 45 of 84 Prev 1 2 3 4 5 .. 6 Next
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    In the best interest of the country unless you're poor / under 62 and need affordable healthcare.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    wwjd Wrote:

    I have been watch through out the day. The one of the most absurd arguments was (paraphrasing): "The president can use the powers of the presidency for his personal gain as long as he also believes it in the best interest of the country"

    No F'ing joke, Dershowitz made that argument.

    Probably the most realistic statement (or threat) made by Trump's defense team was that if the Senate voted to have witnesses, Trump would string out the impeachment process for as long as they could, claiming executive privilege on everything piece of paper and every single witness no matter who they were, and appealing all decisions not made in their favor. They would file multiple lawsuits strictly for the purpose to tie things up.... What was being communicated, was "Trump is willing to make sure everybody goes down with ship, He is not Nixon willing do what is best for the country, Trump will take the country down with him"

    wwjd:

    I agree with you that the argument made by Dershowitz is absurd.

    Heather Cox Richardson also referred to the argument in her letter of January 29.

    Here's a few more points that should be of interest:

    " Before the midterm elections of 1970, it was pretty clear to President Richard Nixon’s advisers that Nixon needed a Hail Mary plan to rally voters around the increasingly beleaguered president. So speechwriter Pat Buchanan and political operative Lee Atwater quite deliberately drew voters to Nixon by accusing their opponents of being lazy, dangerous, and anti-American.

    This division of the electorate and the demonization of the “other” became standard Republican practice. In 1990, under Newt Gingrich‘s direction, GOPAC, the Republican state and local political training organization actually distributed a document called “Language: A Key Mechanism of Control” to elected Republicans. The document urged them to refer to Democrats with words like “corrupt,” “cheat” “disgrace,” “endanger,” “failure,” hypocrisy,” “intolerant,” “liberal,” “lie,” “pathetic,” “sick,” “steal,” “traitors,” “waste,” “welfare,” and—ironically, considering the Republicans current stand—“abuse of power.”

    (The other day, Martha McSally called a CNN reporter a liberal hack)

    It's also true that this kind of nonsense has been going on for a LONG time:

    "Under Woodrow Wilson, the Department of Justice rounded up 3000 immigrants they suspected of being leftists and deported more than 500 of them. And in 1868, southern Democrats convinced that Republican voters were a danger to society lynched more than 1000 black and white Republicans before the 1868 election."

    As you are aware, Trump just held another rally in New Jersey - but the mayor was told not to attend because he had the temerity to ask the organizers to pay for the cost of the rally. Trump, of course, brought up his wall AGAIN. He assured the audience that “the beautiful wall… is going up at record speed,” and that “Mexico is, in fact, you will soon find out, paying for the wall, okay?

    However, he failed to mention that the border wall between the U.S. and Mexico that has been undergoing repairs fell over in 37-mph wind gusts and fell into Mexico.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    I've got the strong feeling that "no witnesses" will be heard and Trump will be "cleared" of any wrongdoing, because of the "cult" which is totally up his ass and got rewarded by him with lots of "handouts". Corrupt to the bone.

    People should know by now that this country is taken over by the "mafia"; it is Trump's way or the highway. His "cult will help this country to become an total "dictatorship". The House will have no more "oversight" , neither the other branches have any say anymore. He will make sure that his pockets remain filled to the brim as well that he can stay as long as he likes.

    Yes America that is what you want and "elected". Guess what will happen with the coming the elections? He will hand out plenty of "money" (not his money!) in the right places to "skew/corrupt" the outcome and no one can accuse him of it; because the Senate "cleared" him of any wrong doing. (now and in the future, because it made the "cult" much stronger)

    The stupid people here have no idea at all what is happening; why throw him out? The economy is doing fine, the employment rate is great, he made an great "deal" with China and Canada/Mexico so let's keep him, who cares about what he does.

    Indeed the stupid masses here have no clue what awaits them in the future; they live here on the "moment" but don't look farther than their noses are long. Trump's past, shows 5 bankruptcies, the next one will be this country; and plenty of lawsuits, he's good in that.

    Yes this country will absolutely go down the drain; and become an Putin like oligarchy, mark my words.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    Kamala Harris managed to get Trump's "Access Hollywood" comments read into the impeachment inquiry by Justice Roberts.

    Crafting her question to the House Managers to include Nixon’s “When the President does it it’s not illegal,” and Trumps “When you're a star, they let you do it. You can do anything,” and his mangled definition of Article 2:

    When you’re a star, they let you do it."
    "Then I have an Article II, where I have the right to do whatever I want as president."

    It's clear Trump thinks he's above the law. My first question today was about what's at stake if the Senate doesn't hold Trump accountable?

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    To quote Marie Antoinette, "let them eat cake!"

    A Brooklyn bakery named Butter & Scotch is sending a cake to each of the 53 Republican senators:

    https://www.grubstreet.com/2020/01/bakery-impeachment-cakes-republican-senators.html?fbclid=IwAR0jB-VizN_UbUn7C92rk2jnU6sDEZIAcFX0nnxCioz3AXyj-msMbLs8KI0

    Here's the cake:

    View image on Twitter

    To quote Jackie Gleason,

    "how sweet it is!"

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    After today, my assessment is that Republican Senators will have enough votes to block any further witnesses, documents, evidence, etc.

    Many Republican Senators will have some sort of public excuse such as "I wanted to have more evidence, but it would not have changed anybody's mind, so there was no point of making the Senate trial even longer. Sure more evidence and witnesses might have been in the public interest, but it wouldn't have changed the outcome. So I voted no to save us months and months."

    What Republican congressmen have going in their favor is that Donald Trump will create more and more controsey almost immediately, so that impeachment trial will be quickly replaced with other Trump scandals. Once Trump is not convicted by the Senate, it will be open season for Trump to do anything and everything he has on TODO list of criminal behavior, and you can bet he wants to get as much done between now and Nov. By election day, impeachment will have been long forgotten, replaced by Trump's more recent BS at that point in time.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    With Lamar Alexander saying he will vote "no" on witnesses and documents, but at the same time saying Trump is guilty of the offense of abusing his power to get dirt on Biden, it sets up an intriguing last day. Both Mitt Romney and Susan Collins will vote "yes" on witnesses while Lisa Murkowski is a "maybe".

    Quoting Alexander: “It was inappropriate for the president to ask a foreign leader to investigate his political opponent and to withhold United States aid to encourage that investigation,” he said in a statement released at 11 p.m. “When elected officials inappropriately interfere with such investigations, it undermines the principle of equal justice under the law. But the Constitution does not give the Senate the power to remove the president from office and ban him from this year’s ballot simply for actions that are inappropriate.”

    Will other Republican Senators admit publicly that yes the SOB is guilty of doing "inappropriate" things, but let the voters decide? Lisa Murkowski slept on her decision overnight. I believe she will follow Alexander's lead.

    The trial therefore ends today. Chief Justice Roberts will be spared the responsibility of having to interject himself into a political issue.

    On the final vote to acquit, Mitt Romney could be the only Republican not giving Trump a unanimous verdict amongst Republicans. It will certainly get Trump's ire, and he will vilify Romney for that vote in his Super Bowl interview with Sean Hannity. Of course, Trump will make all kinds of false claims as he does his victory dance on the Sean Hannity show.

    I hope I am wrong and someone else (Rob Portman perhaps) comes forward and asks for witnesses to be heard. But that's a very low probability.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    I predicted all of this years ago, because the "system/laws" here is totally outdated and the "mafia" has won. That is what you get with an "farce" court proceeding in which the guilty one pays the ones to vote on his behalf and where the judge has no say except playing with pieces of paper. An real banana republic for sure. The Consequences of all of this are going to have an huge impact worldwide. This country can't be trusted anymore and has become an total "dictatorship" by the Trump "mafia". Amen
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Schmidt Wrote:

    With Lamar Alexander saying he will vote "no" on witnesses and documents, but at the same time saying Trump is guilty of the offense of abusing his power to get dirt on Biden, it sets up an intriguing last day. Both Mitt Romney and Susan Collins will vote "yes" on witnesses while Lisa Murkowski is a "maybe".

    Quoting Alexander: “It was inappropriate for the president to ask a foreign leader to investigate his political opponent and to withhold United States aid to encourage that investigation,” he said in a statement released at 11 p.m. “When elected officials inappropriately interfere with such investigations, it undermines the principle of equal justice under the law. But the Constitution does not give the Senate the power to remove the president from office and ban him from this year’s ballot simply for actions that are inappropriate.”

    Will other Republican Senators admit publicly that yes the SOB is guilty of doing "inappropriate" things, but let the voters decide? Lisa Murkowski slept on her decision overnight. I believe she will follow Alexander's lead.

    The trial therefore ends today. Chief Justice Roberts will be spared the responsibility of having to interject himself into a political issue.

    On the final vote to acquit, Mitt Romney could be the only Republican not giving Trump a unanimous verdict amongst Republicans. It will certainly get Trump's ire, and he will vilify Romney for that vote in his Super Bowl interview with Sean Hannity. Of course, Trump will make all kinds of false claims as he does his victory dance on the Sean Hannity show.

    I hope I am wrong and someone else (Rob Portman perhaps) comes forward and asks for witnesses to be heard. But that's a very low probability.

    Schmidt:

    Marc Thiessen writes a twice-weekly column for The Post on foreign and domestic policy. He is a fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, and the former chief speechwriter for President George W. Bush. He is a Fox News contributor.

    In spite of his conservative credentials, his column in this morning's Washington Post actually makes sense.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/01/30/republican-senators-are-being-set-up-by-house/?itid=hp_no-name_opinion-card-g%3Ahomepage%2Fstory-ans

    If Alexander is also joined by other GOP senators saying that they KNOW Trump was guilty, they are going to look very foolish when they run for re-election if they vote to acquit him. The Lincoln Project's ad targeting Martha McSally is one example of what is going to happen to other senators as we get closer to November, and it also is bound to hurt Trump's chances as well.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    There doesn't seem to be the usual harmony of Republicans in their views of the trial. Alan Dershowitz seems to be far right with his "president can do no wrong defense" resulting in some Republicans running to hide. Lamar Alexander's "he did it, but it is not impeachable" defense is not consistent with Trump's "I did nothing wrong" defense.

    Lisa Murkowski is probably checking public opinion in Alaska before she states her "carefully researched views". That view will not go against McConnell, her ultimate authority.

    Mitt Romney doesn't have to worry because he knows Utah Republicans just do not like Trump. Trump has low approval ratings amongst Mormons in Utah so Romney can ride his "white horse" to a different mountain top to preach Mormon morality.

    Then there is Susan Collins...lots of inner struggles and self reflection, but when push comes to shove, votes with the tribe. McConnell has given her a pass on this one to pander to her Maine voters. Her vote on witnesses won't matter.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    Don't even look at that! Trump has "paid" and threatened all the possible "yes" voters, that is the real picture!!!! Everything else is just B.S.

    And no one blinks!! An real "honest" country

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    What a f*cking sham. I hope voters exact revenge on their ignorant republican lawmakers because their lawmakers are clueless about laws of extortion, bribery, perjury, and misleading their constituents. May the GOP rot in hell.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Schmidt Wrote:

    There doesn't seem to be the usual harmony of Republicans in their views of the trial. Alan Dershowitz seems to be far right with his "president can do no wrong defense" resulting in some Republicans running to hide. Lamar Alexander's "he did it, but it is not impeachable" defense is not consistent with Trump's "I did nothing wrong" defense.

    Lisa Murkowski is probably checking public opinion in Alaska before she states her "carefully researched views". That view will not go against McConnell, her ultimate authority.

    Mitt Romney doesn't have to worry because he knows Utah Republicans just do not like Trump. Trump has low approval ratings amongst Mormons in Utah so Romney can ride his "white horse" to a different mountain top to preach Mormon morality.

    Then there is Susan Collins...lots of inner struggles and self reflection, but when push comes to shove, votes with the tribe. McConnell has given her a pass on this one to pander to her Maine voters. Her vote on witnesses won't matter.

    Yes, Trump has put nearly all of Republicans in a catch-22, even those who support him have a very bad taste in their mouth because they feel they have to choose between the lesser of two evils, forced to support something they know is bad for them personally, bad for the republican party, and bad for the country, and they are aware that the only winner is Donald Trump. Its always about him, always.

    What we have seen today is perfect example of "The Trump Effect" which is often described as "Everything Trump touches he destroys". aka, his impact on everyone and everything is cancerous; he corrupts people around him so they become like him, or he uses the powers of the presidency to attack\threaten everyone dares to speak up. He is as toxic as nuclear radiation, and I don't say that as hyperbole, Trump truly is a human being that you, your family, or anyone should not come in contact with because his impact will ALWAY have a bad out come for those he touches.... Trump is the Ring, in Lord Of The Rings, the longer a person is in possession of the Ring, the more corrupt they become. Over time the table becomes turned, and they become controlled by the corruption.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    Everything Trump and McConnell touches "dies". He had 5 bankruptcies; this will become number six.

    That is what you get with an outdated base law asking for corruption, supported by an zillion lawyers and their rich cronies.

    An typical example is, Trump having an Italian mob lawyer called Cipollone; just like any mob boss.

    Congratulations America, you've outdone yourself all the way.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Dockadams Wrote: What a f*cking sham. I hope voters exact revenge on their ignorant republican lawmakers because their lawmakers are clueless about laws of extortion, bribery, perjury, and misleading their constituents. May the GOP rot in hell.


    Dock:

    None of us were surprised by the outcome of the senate "trail". The final vote is now scheduled for Wednesday, conveniently just one day after the State of the Union address. You can't have a trail with witnesses and evidence. Since the senate had neither, then there can't be an acquittal either, which the Democrats are going to remind voters of until November.

    Heather Cos Richardson reminded us yesterday that incriminating evidence will continue to pop up for the next 9 months, and Bolton's book is just part of the facts that will come out.

    " Because, as House impeachment manager Adam Schiff repeatedly warned them, more and more information would continue to drop. And today it did, rather relentlessly. The day started with another leak from the manuscript by former National Security Advisor John Bolton. According to a story by Maggie Haberman and Michael S. Schmidt in the New York Times, in early May, more than two months before the infamous July 25 phone call between Trump and Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky, in which Trump asked Zelensky to announce an investigation into the Bidens in exchange for receiving US military aid, Trump told Bolton to call Zelensky and tell him to meet with Trump’s sometime lawyer Rudy Giuliani to talk over the proposed investigations. While Trump immediately denied this exchange, Bolton’s story matches with other witnesses’ accounts.

    Worse, though, Bolton apparently alleges that the conversation included acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney, already deeply linked into the Ukraine Scandal, Giuliani, and… the White House counsel, Pat A. Cipollone, who is leading the president’s defense team in the impeachment trial. Ouch. Cipollone should have disclosed that he was, at the very least, a material witness to the events at hand, especially since Schiff and the other impeachment managers had written him a letter before the trial started warning him that “You may be a material witness to the charges against President Trump, even though you are also his advocate.”

    Also, Lev Parnas gave money to Kevin McCarthy, Parnas is willing to testify that the Ukraine scheme involved not just Trump, but also Vice President Mike Pence, the GOP Super PAC America First, Former Energy Secretary Rick Perry, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, Attorney General Bill Barr, Senator Lindsey Graham, Congressman Devin Nunes, Nunes’s staffer Derek Harvey, journalist John Solomon (he was the one who printed articles attacking US Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch in The Hill), attorneys Joe DiGenova and Victoria Toensing, and Giuliani. Bondy’s letter claims that Parnas has records and documents to prove his testimony is accurate.

    We learned today that Trump’s reelection campaign spent $1.4 million on legal fees in the fourth quarter of 2019 alone. The fees the campaign paid add up to roughly $12.4 million since Trump took office. That little tidbit should give the Dems a little more ammunition.

    Remember, Marie Yovanovitch? She just retired from foreign service after 33 years, even though she is only 61 years old.