Official LRC President Donald J Trump Thread

No way would they do a secret ballot for an impeachment vote.

They are going to come out of a room after Senators secretly write their votes on pieces of paper and Mitch is going to say - we have 67 votes to convict?

Then you're going to have 50 Republican senators come out and say they didn't vote to convict.

Not happening

Yes, the un-surprising flood of scandals keeps rising.

State Dept.’s Mina Chang got her job without credentials. Other than being a cute whore, I mean.

agip wrote:

Fat hurts wrote:

That is truly interesting.

I think the idea might get enough publicity that it has a small chance of being implemented.

I forgot the link so heah she is raght nawr.

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/11/12/path-to-removing-donald-trump-from-office-229911

Actually, there ARE rules for a Senate impeachment hearing. NOthing in the Constitution says the Senate must consider an impeachment hearing in an expeditious manner. They can choose to postpone it past the 2020 election. They can choose to not even consider it at all. Just as a court need not schedule a trial upon a prosecutor’s wishes, so the Senate can suit its own convenience, not that of the House. Or the Senate could simply vote to reject the case, much as a court can find that a plaintiff cannot win its case, even if all the facts are accepted as true, because it cannot meet the requirements of the law. You guys are screwed.

agip wrote:

Fat hurts wrote:

That is truly interesting.

I think the idea might get enough publicity that it has a small chance of being implemented.

I forgot the link so heah she is raght nawr.

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/11/12/path-to-removing-donald-trump-from-office-229911

I left out the last part...that if trump really knows that he'll be prosecuted when he leaves office he might welcome a secret ballot...so he could first negotiate a blanket deal with the states and then resign.

In other words, he might resign after a secret ballot is announced. with some sort of deal.

That's not my thinking..just repeating what the thought piece suggests.

I don't think this would happen because the first thing every R senator would be asked is 'did you vote guilty or not guilty' and it would just cause chaos. And Rs always hang together - they are willing to do just about anything to stay united as a country. Lord help us.

Sally Vix wrote:

agip wrote:

I forgot the link so heah she is raght nawr.

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/11/12/path-to-removing-donald-trump-from-office-229911

Actually, there ARE rules for a Senate impeachment hearing. NOthing in the Constitution says the Senate must consider an impeachment hearing in an expeditious manner. They can choose to postpone it past the 2020 election. They can choose to not even consider it at all. Just as a court need not schedule a trial upon a prosecutor’s wishes, so the Senate can suit its own convenience, not that of the House. Or the Senate could simply vote to reject the case, much as a court can find that a plaintiff cannot win its case, even if all the facts are accepted as true, because it cannot meet the requirements of the law. You guys are screwed.

mitch has said that there would be a trial soon after the house hands over the impeachment articles.

No one knows, but it certainly appears the evidence will pile in & courts will still have to rule on the stonewalling. The House can just make a provisional set of impeachment articles & wait...

X-Runner wrote:

No way would they do a secret ballot for an impeachment vote.

They are going to come out of a room after Senators secretly write their votes on pieces of paper and Mitch is going to say - we have 67 votes to convict?

Then you're going to have 50 Republican senators come out and say they didn't vote to convict.

Not happening

Under existing laws Senators can not speak on the subject. I found this interesting ...

They never question witnesses, never test documentary evidence, and never interpret the law. They never debate the meaning of “high crimes and misdemeanors.” While silence may treat senators like jurors, it also curbs debate and diminishes political accountability. A trial provides the American people — through the lens of the Senate — the opportunity not just to see but to judge the weight of all of the factual evidence and the legal arguments against President Trump. Under current Senate rules, though, a trial amounts only to a trailer of the House impeachment hearings.

Bolton sez trump only helps Turkey because of his own businesses there.

The Gallant Pig Man wrote:

Rick Gates testifies that he was present when Trump received advance knowledge of the Wikileaks releases in 2016 from Roger Stone. Trump has denied this ever happened under oath. How will Republicans respond to the fact that Trump committed perjury? Will they shrug and call Rick Gates a liar/NEVERTRUMPER? Will they shrug and deflect with "Buh Clinton/Biden..."? Or will they shrug and say perjury isn't really a crime when Republicans do it? So many intellectually bankrupt options to choose from!

In other news, leaked emails from a former white nationalist/Breitbart staffer show that Stephen Miller has long been working with Breitbart to push anti-immigration stories, and that they have been laundering propaganda from white nationalist sites as part of this effort. How surprising!

That’s an easy one. R’s response will be that the Mueller report cleared trump (remember that Barr said so) and because he didn’t find any crimes it means trump didn’t do anything wrong and the witch hunt never ends.

Democrats’ problem: trump is not a typical civilian and he’s above the law as long as GOP protects him. GOP will continue to protect him because he has managed to successfully move the goalpost to the extreme. There is almost no crime that he can commit that will result in conviction by the senate. Since he is unlikely to commit direct homicide they will therefore continue to support him feverishly.

There is what you claim and then there is what you peddle every single day here. You unequivocally adore trump. We at least know you are not crazy since we have on record that you agreed he has committed an impeachable offense. That still leaves 10% troll and 90% stupid.

Fat hurts wrote:

agip wrote:

Just read an intersting piece that maps out a route to remove trump.

there are no rules for the senate trial.

So, say, three R senators hold out and insist on a secret ballot, like in regular trials.

Say McConnell can't beat them back.

So a secret ballot is adopted.

We all know many R senators would vote to convict if they could do it on a secret ballot.

It's not going to happen, but it is interesting to think of three R senators, say in their 70s, who want to leave a mark for history.

That is truly interesting.

I think the idea might get enough publicity that it has a small chance of being implemented.

I always loved the idea of secret ballots for all political voting. It promotes anonymous pushback and checking of your own party. Though this is interesting there is no way those dissenting Rs would get away with it. The GOP is being run like a mafia right now.

Yes, you have to start somewhere. Maybe this is where we start.

What VW did in the dieselgate scandal is slightly different and may not apply here. They rigged their cars to pass government emissions tests. I'm pretty sure there was no case of presenting false research.

It will take a long time to determine if what Exxon did was illegal or not. And as far as I know, the cases being brought are civil and state cases. If there was a clear federal law that applies to what Exxon did then maybe Exxon wouldn't have done it. Or, at least it would be much easier to prosecute them in federal court.

Trolliminator - more insults? Seriously? Can you just disagree with me without insulting me? It is what middle school kids do. The adults chose to have an honest discourse with even-handed opposition. No insults. No name-calling. No other crap. Just honest discourse. But apparently you are acting like a middle school child. That is fine. You can act however you want but NEVER contact me again. I don't do that insult shitt.

Sally Vix wrote:

agip wrote:

I forgot the link so heah she is raght nawr.

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/11/12/path-to-removing-donald-trump-from-office-229911

Actually, there ARE rules for a Senate impeachment hearing. NOthing in the Constitution says the Senate must consider an impeachment hearing in an expeditious manner. They can choose to postpone it past the 2020 election. They can choose to not even consider it at all. Just as a court need not schedule a trial upon a prosecutor’s wishes, so the Senate can suit its own convenience, not that of the House. Or the Senate could simply vote to reject the case, much as a court can find that a plaintiff cannot win its case, even if all the facts are accepted as true, because it cannot meet the requirements of the law. You guys are screwed.

There are big political consequences if Mitch refuses to take up impeachment in a serious manner.

Mitch has already said that a trial will be held if the house votes "yes" on impeachment.

I wouldn't be too surprised if Mitch changes his mind but I wouldn't count on it either.

What are the political consequences. Mitch has the power to delay this impeachment process for 1000 years. Trump, as much as you hate him, is going nowhere. He is the president and he is YOUR president no matter how sick that makes you. He is OUR president. Let's gather around him and help him make our country great again!

1000-year delay? Sure, if every lie trump tells in the next day buys a year delay. He’s currently on about a thousand a day, but he has to keep increasing the dose to get the same effect.

Sally Vix wrote:

Trollminator wrote:

There is what you claim and then there is what you peddle every single day here. You unequivocally adore trump. We at least know you are not crazy since we have on record that you agreed he has committed an impeachable offense. That still leaves 10% troll and 90% stupid.

Trolliminator - more insults? Seriously? Can you just disagree with me without insulting me? It is what middle school kids do. The adults chose to have an honest discourse with even-handed opposition. No insults. No name-calling. No other crap. Just honest discourse. But apparently you are acting like a middle school child. That is fine. You can act however you want but NEVER contact me again. I don't do that insult shitt.

You’re not interested in substance - until then [post ignored] as FP says, although I may choose to address you if I wish to

Would it be politically better Mitch to acquit Trump or not hold the trial at all?

I assume it may be better to hold no trial if he looks really guilty.

Trollminator wrote:

Sally Vix wrote:

Trolliminator - more insults? Seriously? Can you just disagree with me without insulting me? It is what middle school kids do. The adults chose to have an honest discourse with even-handed opposition. No insults. No name-calling. No other crap. Just honest discourse. But apparently you are acting like a middle school child. That is fine. You can act however you want but NEVER contact me again. I don't do that insult shitt.

You’re not interested in substance - until then [post ignored] as FP says, although I may choose to address you if I wish to

Here is the deal. I have NO desire to ever talk to you again. You are a two-bit turd - and I hate that term. Just NEVER EVER respond to me. I will not miss you. You bring NOTHING to the table. Troll - you and I are DONE!