While it was taxing, I watched the entire first day of the Impeachment proceedings of DJT. Watched both Prosecution and Defense.
The vote on whether or not this trial was constitutional came out as expected of 56 for, 44 against proceeding..
Personally, although the Prosecutors had some very emotional and condemning arguments, the defense was more technical on what Impeachment is and technically should be. I've stated many times that I am not a DJT fan and I tend to consider things from a less than emotional perspective. It's pretty damn obvious this is more of a political confrontation to ensure DJT can't run for President again. While he may try, unless he runs against the current Speaker of the House Pelosi or maybe even HRC, I sincerely doubt he could win again.
The Dems have hired a commercial movie company to produce a video version of the riot and other stuff to support their case, should be entertaining. I hope they include clips of Rep Maxine Waters and several others giving inflammatory and inciting speeches. That may be too much to ask for.
If Trump decides to run again in 2024, I'm predicting that he will run as a Republican but if he goes the third party route the Republican party will die.
I would like to go on record as saying that the very idea is outrageous, a total sham, a circus and an affront to the sanctity of both the legislative and executive branches. However, in a time where the bizarre has become banal, I can barely eke out a convincing yawn.
Yes, this is cancel culture to the extreme. And I think it's disgusting.
I'm also not a big fan of Donald Trump. But I held my nose and voted for him, because IMO he wasn't as bad as the alternative.
That said, I believe the intended purpose of impeachment is to remove a current President. I also believe the leftists are (ab)using impeachment, solely to serve an agenda. But they're so focused on trying to 'cancel' Donald Trump, they might get blind-sided by the next Republican candidate.
Speaking of which, I hope Ron DiSantis runs for Prez in 2024. He will get my vote, if he does. He's our current Governor (in Florida), and he's been doing a great job!
[This message has been edited by Blacktree (edited 02-09-2021).]
While it was taxing, I watched the entire first day of the Impeachment proceedings of DJT. Watched both Prosecution and Defense.
The vote on whether or not this trial was constitutional came out as expected of 56 for, 44 against proceeding..
Personally, although the Prosecutors had some very emotional and condemning arguments, the defense was more technical on what Impeachment is and technically should be. I've stated many times that I am not a DJT fan and I tend to consider things from a less than emotional perspective. It's pretty damn obvious this is more of a political confrontation to ensure DJT can't run for President again. While he may try, unless he runs against the current Speaker of the House Pelosi or maybe even HRC, I sincerely doubt he could win again.
The Dems have hired a commercial movie company to produce a video version of the riot and other stuff to support their case, should be entertaining. I hope they include clips of Rep Maxine Waters and several others giving inflammatory and inciting speeches. That may be too much to ask for.
Your thoughts?
Rams
It's hard to choke down some of the crap that we are fed now and told its news. So they are putting together a hollywood version of his speech? If it's edited in any way how can it be considered as evidence? I don't give a **** about Trump, it's about how they are twisting the laws and ignoring the constitution. Today it's Trump, what will they do tomorrow?
It's hard to choke down some of the crap that we are fed now and told its news. So they are putting together a hollywood version of his speech? If it's edited in any way how can it be considered as evidence? I don't give a **** about Trump, it's about how they are twisting the laws and ignoring the constitution. Today it's Trump, what will they do tomorrow?
They had tweets that people made as evidence today. Anything is evidence now!
It's yet another offshoot of the fact the left has never gotten over HRC losing to Trump in 2016. They couldn't accept it, have never gotten over it, swear the election was stolen by both the Russians and FBI's Comey and they are still looking for some kind of revenge. Couple that with the fact that Trump did come close to winning re-election and the left is still in bloodfest frenzy to get him out of politics forever over fear he may prevail in 2024, but it all goes back to 2016.
It's yet another offshoot of the fact the left has never gotten over HRC losing to Trump in 2016. They couldn't accept it, have never gotten over it, swear the election was stolen by both the Russians and FBI's Comey and they are still looking for some kind of revenge. Couple that with the fact that Trump did come close to winning re-election and the left is still in bloodfest frenzy to get him out of politics forever over fear he may prevail in 2024, but it all goes back to 2016.
Agreed. I was surprised that DJT won the Republican nomination, he was never my favorite candidate. But, he got my vote based on who the opposition was. While I still am not a fan of DJT personally, I do think he did a good job.
I guess that makes me several different un-complimentary things. It is, what it is.
Rams
[This message has been edited by blackrams (edited 02-10-2021).]
They had tweets that people made as evidence today. Anything is evidence now!
Sadly that is the case. Most that are tried by society never recover even when they are proven innocent. My girlfriends second cousin knows a guy that said he saw you in the park. Now you are in the park, what could be bad about being in the park? Depends on how the media wants you to be seen.
The hate for Trump is an old and long hatred. It is being used to cloud what is really going on. There will be long standing conflicts raised by these actions. Manipulation on both sides and pressure to be seen will cause irreversible damage to our nation.
Journalists are egotists by nature. They think they're the smartest people in the room and have ultimate say about the spin you have to accept. If you disagree, you're a denier and aligning yourself with dangerous terrorists.
Trump troll-blasted them, making himself their enemy. He huffed and puffed and blew their dresses up exposing their peccadilloes and transgressions. In him, they trained their combined skulduggery to protect their benefactors and livelihood. They want to remain the priest class of clown kingdom.
I wonder if anyone who's plugged into the wagering scene can talk about what kinds of bets are being offered.
Could someone place a bet that the Dems will reel in anywhere from 3 to 5 Republican votes to convict?. And what's the commonly understood terminology for such a wager? "Under" and "over" and "spread"..? I'm not versed in the vernacular.
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 02-10-2021).]
The vote on whether or not this trial was constitutional came out as expected of 56 for, 44 against proceeding..
We have a Judicial Branch of our government in which resides The Supreme Court of the United States whose mandate it is to decide what is constitutional and what isn't.
That separate branch of our government and that particular court were instituted by the founders of this country specifically to preclude the legislative branch from doing what it just did.
Demorats have now pointedly decided to simply dispense with those little "inconveniences" called The Constitution and the separation of powers defined therein.
Chief Justice John Roberts refusal to participate in "Impeachment 2, Kangaroo Court Boogaloo" becomes more prescient by the day.
We have a Judicial Branch of our government in which resides The Supreme Court of the United States whose mandate it is to decide what is constitutional and what isn't.
That separate branch of our government and that particular court were instituted by the founders of this country specifically to preclude the legislative branch from doing what it just did.
Demorats have now pointedly decided to simply dispense with those little "inconveniences" called The Constitution and the separation of powers defined therein.
Chief Justice John Roberts refusal to participate in "Impeachment 2, Kangaroo Court Boogaloo" becomes more prescient by the day.
On the positive side, the Dems have now set the rules for future impeachments. I don't expect Biden to run again but, I'm think'n Harris has her time coming. Speaker Pelosi would be next on my list. But, since she's already indicated she won't run for Speaker again, I'm think'n she's realized she's done all the damage she can.
As of this point, (as I understand it) the FBI is charging about 250 people with rioting or charges similar to include simple trespassing but, there are some serious charges. Did anyone get a count of how many people were there protesting? 10K, 50K, 100K? Just imagine if, all the protestors or, 74 Mililion had actually been intent to capture Pelosi and others. We might have some new folks in charge. But, that wasn't the case, was it.
Rams
[This message has been edited by blackrams (edited 02-10-2021).]
On the positive side, the Dems have now set the rules for future impeachments. I don't expect Biden to run again but, I'm think'n Harris has her time coming. Speaker Pelosi would be next on my list. But, since she's already indicated she won't run for Speaker again, I'm think'n she's realized she's done all the damage she can.
As of this point, (as I understand it) the FBI is charging about 250 people with rioting or charges similar to include simple trespassing but, there are some serious charges. Did anyone get a count of how many people were there protesting? 10K, 50K, 100K? Just imagine if, all the protestors or, 74 Mililion had actually been intent to capture Pelosi and others. We might have some new folks in charge. But, that wasn't the case, was it.
Rams
I disagree. I think she would happily continue in her position for as long as she remains in Congress if she thought she could again garner enough support in the House but with 'progressivism' being the left's NBT, she saw the handwriting on the wall and is pre-empting a loss of face vote next time around.
It's one thing to lose House leadership position because the opposition won control of the House, but another thing entirely if your own party replaces you. That prospect is something she probably wouldn't handle well. Unless I read it wrong, she had to make some serious wheelin&dealin on the side to even retain speakership this time and I suspect the promise to make this her last was part of the deal.
Between the Bernie socialists and the squad types, her days as Speaker of the House appear to be numbered anyway. Good Riddance.
What's important to the Democrats is how this conditions popular opinion after Trump is acquitted. When there's 50 or more votes to convict Trump but less than the two thirds majority (supermajority) of 67 votes to formally convict him.
"To lose is to win, and he who wins loses [all.]" ~ Doctor Who
I have the word "all" in brackets because I think it needs to be there for "punch" but the actual sentence that I quoted stops with "loses."
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 02-10-2021).]
What's important to the Democrats is how this conditions popular opinion after Trump is acquitted. When there's 50 or more votes to convict Trump but less than the two thirds majority (supermajority) of 67 votes to formally convict him.
"To lose is to win, and he who wins loses [all.]" ~ Doctor Who
I have the word "all" in brackets because I think it needs to be there for "punch" but the actual sentence that I quoted stops with "loses."
A great big fail on the part of vindictive Democrats. When will they grow up? rhetorical question.
[This message has been edited by sourmash (edited 02-10-2021).]
Originally posted by blackrams: While it was taxing, I watched the entire first day of the Impeachment proceedings of DJT.
Your thoughts?
Taxing ? Comedic gold. I have watched both days. Sad I might have to miss tomorrows episode.
Of course no one expects the Dumbs to tell the truth, but, those whiney sniveling Stupids need to wake up. This time we just disrupted their sleep walking.
Taxing ? Comedic gold. I have watched both days. Sad I might have to miss tomorrows episode.
Of course no one expects the Dumbs to tell the truth, but, those whiney sniveling Stupids need to wake up. This time we just disrupted their sleep walking.
Not a prediction but, they only saw a few hundred really pissed off folks, they don't want to see 74 million.
Having watched much of this day's Impeachment proceedings, I just heard a Democrat (in an interview) discuss how this impeachment was not like the first impeachment, that there's wasn't the "political" issues as much.
My thought was, how much of the "Protest" does he think may be associated to the unproven accusations of the first impeachment and resentment from that. There were and are still a lot of center and right wing folks ticked about how DJT has been treated his entire presidency. The entire 4 years DJT was in office, he has been under siege by the left. I am not suggesting this was a one sided battle but, there were attempts to impeach him the first week he was in office. I say all this all the while not being a Trump fan.
This whole impeachment process has only one real goal. To sway any possibility of running again for DJT. I used to think raising hogs and chickens was the nastiest job one could have. I now believe politics is far worse.
Saw a bumper sticker just the other day, it said, "IMPEACH BIDEN".
Rams
[This message has been edited by blackrams (edited 02-11-2021).]
It will also be interesting to see what happens with the Georgia investigation that Fulton County DA has opened up. I doubt much will come of it but there is this to consider:
Fulton County is one of the most reliably Democratic counties in the entire nation. It has voted Democratic in every presidential election since 1876, except that of 1928 and again in 1972, when George McGovern could not win a single county in Georgia.
It will also be interesting to see what happens with the Georgia investigation that Fulton County DA has opened up. I doubt much will come of it but there is this to consider:
Fulton County is one of the most reliably Democratic counties in the entire nation. It has voted Democratic in every presidential election since 1876, except that of 1928 and again in 1972, when George McGovern could not win a single county in Georgia.
Former President Trump is not a resident of the state of Georgia.
Former President Trump has never been a resident of the state of Georgia.
The state of Georgia has no jurisdiction over Former President Trump.
"Mr Trump was very enthusiastic until he realized this isn't Futon County. I guess he thought it had something to do with the MyPillow guy."
Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis
When I was just a rich kid, my daddy told me: Son, always be a good boy. Don’t ever play with lawyers. But I called a man in Georgia, just to tell him “Hi” When I hear Chuck Schumer talking, I shake my head and sigh.
I hear Ms Willis whining, I think she’s gone round the bend. And I ain’t seen a day off, since this all began. No luck in Fulton County, it just keeps dragging on. The BS keeps on rolling, since I hung up the phone.
What's important to the Democrats is how this conditions popular opinion after Trump is acquitted. When there's 50 or more votes to convict Trump but less than the two thirds majority (supermajority) of 67 votes to formally convict him.
<SNIP>
David Frum is a staff writer at The Atlantic and the author of Trumpocalypse: Restoring American Democracy (2020). In 2001 and 2002, he was a speechwriter for President George W. Bush. Here we see him echoing what I said previously in this thread.
David Frum is a staff writer at The Atlantic and the author of Trumpocalypse: Restoring American Democracy (2020). In 2001 and 2002, he was a speechwriter for President George W. Bush. Here we see him echoing what I said previously in this thread.
I don't think the impeachment will change anyone's mind. Half of the country will continue to distrust Democrats and the other half will still be afraid of Trump. Is "Dancing with the Stars" still on TV?
Having watched the Impeachment proceedings, it is plainly clear the "Prosecution" set up a very emotional condemnation of what occurred on 6 Jan. That emotion being hate, hate of DJT. The defense attempting to apply rules of evidence (to me) have clearly shown the rioting was pre-planned by radical extremist. So why is this even happening? I don't even like DJT (as a person) but, having just observed the defense. I could not support a vote for conviction.
I think we all know the answer to that question.
I've been watching this on NBC, the bias is so acute, it's sickening. I expect Chuck Todd to run for office as a Democrat soon.
Rams
[This message has been edited by blackrams (edited 02-12-2021).]
Having watched the Impeachment proceedings, it is plainly clear the "Prosecution" set up a very emotional condemnation of what occurred on 6 Jan. That emotion being hate, hate of DJT.
I have pointed out many times before that Leftists form their opinions and make their decisions based largely or primarily on emotion / feelings.
Very little, if any, objective factual data and analysis is involved. Critical thinking is absent.
They have significant problems with discerning opinions and emotions from objective facts and see all of them with equal value.
They can hold and earnestly believe two or more completely contradictory and irreconcilable ideas in their heads simultaneously and apparently be completely unaware or unconcerned by it.
This how they see and scrutinize the world around them and consequently how they assume others do as well, so it is unsurprising that they would make emotion the most integral part of their shampeachment presentation.
[This message has been edited by randye (edited 02-12-2021).]
I have pointed out many times before that Leftists form their opinions and make their decisions based largely or primarily on emotion / feelings.
Very little, if any, objective factual data and analysis is involved. Critical thinking is absent.
They have significant problems with discerning opinions and emotions from objective facts and see all of them with equal value.
They can hold and earnestly believe two or more completely contradictory and irreconcilable ideas in their heads simultaneously and apparently be completely unaware or unconcerned by it.
This how they see and scrutinize the world around them and consequently how they assume others do as well, so it is unsurprising that they would make emotion the most integral part of their shampeachment presentation.
I have to say, quite honestly... I've never seen this worded so well and so succinctly to the point. I agree with this 100% and is very representative of my experience with the vast majority of my friends who are Democrat.
Great comment. The only thing I would add to your "They have significant problems with discerning opinions and emotions from objective facts and see all of them with equal value" is objective facts AND RULE OF EXISTING LAW.
Great comment. The only thing I would add to your "They have significant problems with discerning opinions and emotions from objective facts and see all of them with equal value" is objective facts AND RULE OF EXISTING LAW.
Jeff
Thanks, however the rule of law is, by it's very nature, factual, and usually very precise. It is also totally bereft of emotion.
Law is so factual and precise that individual words have great importance, such as the difference between the words may and shall.
This is illustrated in the law of the United States as codified in our Constitution:
Article I, Section 3:
"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside..."
It doesn't say that the Chief Justice might or may. The Constitution unequivocally and precisely says the Chief Justice SHALL preside.
There is no Constitutional provision to force the Chief Justice to preside and there is NO case law that addresses it.
Likewise there is absolutely NO Constitutional provision that allows the Congress or either of the other two branches of government to appoint anyone else to serve in place of the Chief Justice.
That means that the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court must preside and in the present instance where Chief Justice Roberts has refused to participate the Senate should have been left incapable and without legal jurisdiction to proceed unless or until the issue was settled by the Judicial Branch of our government.
Senate Leftists, with the help of some incredibly ignorant Senate Republicans, completely usurped the legal role of the Judicial Branch to decide what is Constitutional or not and instead voted among themselves if or how the United States Constitution limits them and went ahead with this travesty.
They also appointed a currently serving, partisan politician and member of the former President's opposition party to preside instead of the Chief Justice.
We are now very firmly in Banana Republic, totalitarian, territory and as someone else said in another thread; "I don't know where we go from here."
My very firm sense is that if this behavior of those presently holding the reins of power in our government continues unabated, eventually the guns will come out, the bullets will fly and blood will flow.
[This message has been edited by randye (edited 02-12-2021).]
Well, it should be over tomorrow. Thank God for that.
It's my honest opinion that if the jurist/Senators were able to wipe the partisan hate from their hearts and minds during the vote, not one vote would go to convict. That's not to suggest I like DJT but, he is not guilty of the charge against him. Period.
