Hey, Libs! Trump acquittal day coming soon.
Tick, tick, tick.
KAG2020
Hey, Libs! Trump acquittal day coming soon.
Tick, tick, tick.
KAG2020
Today our country refused to have witnesses with relevant information speak at a trial regarding presidential abuse.
Think about that for a moment.
The trial without witnesses will go done in infamy and be a historically black mark on this country. Those responsible for denying the process of justice will be judged accordingly by history.
I can't wait for the elections.
Truth b told2 wrote:
Today our country refused to have witnesses with relevant information speak at a trial regarding presidential abuse.
Think about that for a moment.
The trial without witnesses will go done in infamy and be a historically black mark on this country. Those responsible for denying the process of justice will be judged accordingly by history.
I can't wait for the elections.
This is Pelosi's last year as Speaker. The GOP will regain the majority in the House.
Impeachment backfire.
Rigged for Hillary wrote:
Hey, Libs! Trump acquittal day coming soon.
Tick, tick, tick.
KAG2020
Why should we care what you say? You said Trump wouldn't even be impeached. You are the biggest loser. Oh, and no, Republicans are not going to take back the House.
Smorbun wrote:
Rigged for Hillary wrote:
Hey, Libs! Trump acquittal day coming soon.
Tick, tick, tick.
KAG2020
Why should we care what you say? You said Trump wouldn't even be impeached. You are the biggest loser. Oh, and no, Republicans are not going to take back the House.
Why so triggered, Sore buns?
I sometimes take the pulse of my fellow Hoosiers by reading comments on our Senators (both Republican) Facebook pages. I was mildly surprised to see comments about 20-1 in favor of asking for witnesses, and suggesting both aren't doing their jobs when it comes to the trial.
Granted, neither is up for re-election in this cycle, so it probably won't matter.
Truth b told2 wrote:
Fat hurts wrote:
Republican Lamar Alexander has come out and said that Tiny is guilty on abuse of power. He says "not guilty" on obstruction. He says the case is already proven so we don't need more witnesses.
But he thinks that this "abuse of power" is not impeachable. He thinks it is merely inappropriate to use taxpayer money to help himself get re-elected.
That is a sickening bit of twisted logic.
From the beginning I was very upset that they didn't impeach him for bribery. Nobody can argue that bribery is not impeachable because it is directly in the constitution. It's looking like the choice of "abuse of power" was the Democrats' fatal mistake. And our nation will pay dearly for it.
I whole heartily agree bribery or even more accurately extortion should have been used. Those terms carry the political punch that the democrats needed. Republicans would have used those terms.I
I still think senators will pay at election time. The Republican senators sold America out and were remiss fulfilling their oath of office.
I really doubt semantics would have made much of a difference, the GOP was set to protect no matter what and there just was not enough time for public sentiment to have any effect on their strategy.
What I really think would have made a difference is if the Dems tried to drag the WH through court. Maybe nearing election it would have looked awful for the WH to continue to fight release of witnesses and evidence... but at same time it might have looked awful for Dems to drag it out. They probably went with the best move in putting the ball on GOPs court and exposing the cover up.
Rigged for Hillary wrote:
This is Pelosi's last year as Speaker. The GOP will regain the majority in the House.
Impeachment backfire.
Does this situation resemble 1999 at all to you?
truth b told2 wrote:
Also check the chart of our deficit spending. This level of debt is unheard in nonwar and in healthy economic times. It is pretty irresponsible but that won't surprise anyone.
And who controls the spending...that’s right the Democrat controlled Congress.
Is Flagpole update?
Trollminator wrote:
I really doubt semantics would have made much of a difference, the GOP was set to protect no matter what and there just was not enough time for public sentiment to have any effect on their strategy.
This was not just a matter of semantics. The impeachment charges carry the force of law that stems directly from the Constitution.
Senator Alexander was able to wiggle out by saying that while "abuse of power" was proven, he did not see that as an impeachable offense. There is no way he could have justified his position if the charge was "bribery". If he thinks the prosecution proved "bribery" then he must vote "guilty".
When it comes to the law, words matter. The Democrats made a huge error by not charging the president with "bribery".
Trollminator wrote:
Truth b told2 wrote:
I whole heartily agree bribery or even more accurately extortion should have been used. Those terms carry the political punch that the democrats needed. Republicans would have used those terms.I
I still think senators will pay at election time. The Republican senators sold America out and were remiss fulfilling their oath of office.
I really doubt semantics would have made much of a difference, the GOP was set to protect no matter what and there just was not enough time for public sentiment to have any effect on their strategy.
What I really think would have made a difference is if the Dems tried to drag the WH through court. Maybe nearing election it would have looked awful for the WH to continue to fight release of witnesses and evidence... but at same time it might have looked awful for Dems to drag it out. They probably went with the best move in putting the ball on GOPs court and exposing the cover up.
Trump was going to get off regardless of what the dems did. But come election time I wanted voters to think he got away with bribery or extortion.
Those terms carry more punch with the electorate.
Fat hurts wrote:
Trollminator wrote:
I really doubt semantics would have made much of a difference, the GOP was set to protect no matter what and there just was not enough time for public sentiment to have any effect on their strategy.
This was not just a matter of semantics. The impeachment charges carry the force of law that stems directly from the Constitution.
Senator Alexander was able to wiggle out by saying that while "abuse of power" was proven, he did not see that as an impeachable offense. There is no way he could have justified his position if the charge was "bribery". If he thinks the prosecution proved "bribery" then he must vote "guilty".
When it comes to the law, words matter. The Democrats made a huge error by not charging the president with "bribery".
Good point.
Fat hurts wrote:
Trollminator wrote:
I really doubt semantics would have made much of a difference, the GOP was set to protect no matter what and there just was not enough time for public sentiment to have any effect on their strategy.
This was not just a matter of semantics. The impeachment charges carry the force of law that stems directly from the Constitution.
Senator Alexander was able to wiggle out by saying that while "abuse of power" was proven, he did not see that as an impeachable offense. There is no way he could have justified his position if the charge was "bribery". If he thinks the prosecution proved "bribery" then he must vote "guilty".
When it comes to the law, words matter. The Democrats made a huge error by not charging the president with "bribery".
The GOP and WH defense would have done the same song and dance if the charge was bribery. They would have just moved the goal post to adjust to the charge... "the president believed he was acting in the interest of the country", "his actions, even if deemed bribery, simply do not rise to the level of impeachment"... come on man.
This is not about law at all - did you not hear the WH defense twist words and say even if the abuse of power had a criminal element it would not rise to level of impeachment? Impeachment is a political process and the only thing that matters is public opinion.
In the case of trump, the GOP and defense team knew very well the public had a very tolerance for his wrongdoings... no one denies he's unethical, sloppy and a dirty player. All they had to do is adjust the goal post to fit the charges. There were never going to allow witnesses and additional evidence... and as they said, even if they did they did not think it mattered as the charges did not rise to the level of impeachment.
As for Lamar... the GOP just made him a red herring and fall guy.. he did them one last favor to remain in their graces after retirement. They made it seem like he could be initially convinced so that it gave the others an out to vote how they want to. He was never going to ask for witnesses. Through him turkey neck set the stage for the rest to follow.
Truth b told2 wrote:
Today our country refused to have witnesses with relevant information speak at a trial regarding presidential abuse.
Think about that for a moment.
The trial without witnesses will go done in infamy and be a historically black mark on this country. Those responsible for denying the process of justice will be judged accordingly by history.
I can't wait for the elections.
When Adam Schiff stood up and started reading out fictional conversations (maybe in an attempt to win an Emmy award ?♂️)...that was the “black mark” on this country!
Rigged for Hillary wrote:
Smorbun wrote:
Why should we care what you say? You said Trump wouldn't even be impeached. You are the biggest loser. Oh, and no, Republicans are not going to take back the House.
Why so triggered, Sore buns?
Not triggered. You are just the most wrong person on this whole site and also the dumbest.
Smorbun wrote:
Rigged for Hillary wrote:
Why so triggered, Sore buns?
Not triggered. You are just the most wrong person on this whole site and also the dumbest.
Acquittal day is almost here.
Mueller came and went.
The dems failed to oust Trump.
Trump is still your POTUS.
You lose again, Sore buns.
Trollminator wrote:
Fat hurts wrote:
This was not just a matter of semantics. The impeachment charges carry the force of law that stems directly from the Constitution.
Senator Alexander was able to wiggle out by saying that while "abuse of power" was proven, he did not see that as an impeachable offense. There is no way he could have justified his position if the charge was "bribery". If he thinks the prosecution proved "bribery" then he must vote "guilty".
When it comes to the law, words matter. The Democrats made a huge error by not charging the president with "bribery".
The GOP and WH defense would have done the same song and dance if the charge was bribery. They would have just moved the goal post to adjust to the charge... "the president believed he was acting in the interest of the country", "his actions, even if deemed bribery, simply do not rise to the level of impeachment"... come on man.
This is not about law at all - did you not hear the WH defense twist words and say even if the abuse of power had a criminal element it would not rise to level of impeachment? Impeachment is a political process and the only thing that matters is public opinion.
In the case of trump, the GOP and defense team knew very well the public had a very tolerance for his wrongdoings... no one denies he's unethical, sloppy and a dirty player. All they had to do is adjust the goal post to fit the charges. There were never going to allow witnesses and additional evidence... and as they said, even if they did they did not think it mattered as the charges did not rise to the level of impeachment.
As for Lamar... the GOP just made him a red herring and fall guy.. he did them one last favor to remain in their graces after retirement. They made it seem like he could be initially convinced so that it gave the others an out to vote how they want to. He was never going to ask for witnesses. Through him turkey neck set the stage for the rest to follow.
I'll add that Lamar is calling trump's actions an error in judgement... he would have used that for any charge. Any other potus could not afford such errors in judgement, but it's trump so...
As to what words would resonate more with voters in Nov... probably bribery, but Dems will be calling it that anyway.
Looks like Trump is winning the Keystone State again.
KAG2020