Bi-Partisan Support For Impeachment

[DC Tom]

6 hours ago, Foxx said:

really good point.

https://twitter.com/RepLizCheney/status/1184521889135386624

 

 

Determining House procedure lies solely with the House.  Which means that the House has the sole responsibility of determining how they pursue impeachment.  So let's go check the parlimentary rules for the current sitting House, and see what they say about impeachment.  They say...

 

...nothing.  There are no defined impeachment procedures.  They basically half-ass it on the fly.  

 

But - and this is important - they have a Constitutional right to determine their impeachment procedure as "half-assing it on the fly."  It's like McConnell's hold-up of the Garland nomination: stupid, juvenile, counter-productive, and entirely Constitutional.

[Foxx]

3 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

Determining House procedure lies solely with the House.  Which means that the House has the sole responsibility of determining how they pursue impeachment.  So let's go check the parlimentary rules for the current sitting House, and see what they say about impeachment.  They say...

 

...nothing.  There are no defined impeachment procedures.  They basically half-ass it on the fly.  

 

But - and this is important - they have a Constitutional right to determine their impeachment procedure as "half-assing it on the fly."  It's like McConnell's hold-up of the Garland nomination: stupid, juvenile, counter-productive, and entirely Constitutional.

how do we know the House actually supports this star chamber impeachment inquiry and that it is not just upon the whims of president wannabe Pelosi and her cohorts? it could be that they are intimidated into silent acquiescence by her standing. without a vote to express the will of the entire House, it is, as you say... half-assing it.

 

at some point the transcripts will have to be released. because of the on the fly routine here, who knows if they will before there is a vote on articles of impeachment but it will have to be done as supporting evidence of their article(s) of impeachment that gets forwarded to the Senate for a trial.

 

this is all grandstanding to minimize their ineptitude.  if they learned anything from the Mueller Report hearings, it is that they learned to not let their agenda get B word slapped in the public eye.

[DC Tom]

Just now, Foxx said:

how do we know the House actually supports this star chamber impeachment inquiry and that it is not just upon the whims of president wannabe Pelosi and her cohorts? it could be that they are intimidated into silent acquiescence by her standing. without a vote to express the will of the entire House, it is, as you say... half-assing it.

 

at some point the transcripts will have to be released. because of the on the fly routine here, who knows if they will before there is a vote on articles of impeachment but it will have to be done as supporting evidence of their article(s) of impeachment that gets forwarded to the Senate for a trial.

 

this is all grandstanding to minimize their ineptitude.  if they learned anything from the Mueller Report hearings, it is that they learned to not let their agenda get B word slapped in the public eye.

 

Still Constitutional.  The Houses of Congress have sole discretion to determine their rules of proceedings, including how they determine their rules of proceedings.  There's nothing that says the House can't simply allow the Speaker to make it up as he goes along.  

[row_33]

1 minute ago, DC Tom said:

 

Still Constitutional.  The Houses of Congress have sole discretion to determine their rules of proceedings, including how they determine their rules of proceedings.  There's nothing that says the House can't simply allow the Speaker to make it up as he goes along.  

 

An impeachable offense is whatever a majority of the House of Representatives considers it to be at a given moment in history.  Gerald Ford.

[B-Man]

THE JOURNOLIST IS HOPPING: No More Pretense: Journalists, Dems Use Identical Talking Points on Impeachment (Video).

 

Just think of the media as Democratic Party operatives with Chyrons, and their lockstep phraseology all makes sense.

 

 

 

 

 

I said this after the First debate.................

 

 

Democrats have reason to worry after the last presidential debate.

 

 

 

 

 

.

[Deranged Rhino]

 

 

[B-Man]

 

 

 

Impeachment Becomes A Psychodrama Of the Press.

 

 

 

 

 

Iowa 2020: Just 7% call impeachment ‘important.

 

 

.

 

 

 

 

.

Edited October 18, 2019 by B-Man

[3rdnlng]

Where is this bi-partisan support for impeachment?

[3rdnlng]

The OP, someone called @Tiberius, made a claim that there is bi-partisan support for impeachment. Where's the proof?

[Tiberius]

Just because they have the evidence if guilt, testimony of guilt and have a duty to

protect the constitution doesn't mean they have to impeach this corrupt POS, but it is the right thing to do 

[Deranged Rhino]

53 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said:

The OP, someone called @Tiberius, made a claim that there is bi-partisan support for impeachment. Where's the proof?

 

This is all he's got: 

 

[Deranged Rhino]

 

 

[Bob in Mich]

8 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

 

Coups don't need to follow any rules.  If this is a coup, they should just arrest those whining 9 Republicans.  That would send a good message to the rest of the Republicans.  This is a coup and if any stinkin Republican gets in the way, we should put them up against the wall....just like we would see in a real coup.

 

What?  Not happening?  Hmm, maybe we are witnessing a highly partisan, fully constitutional, political impeachment process and not a coup?  Just a thought

[Deranged Rhino]

1 minute ago, Bob in Mich said:

 

Coups don't need to follow any rules.  If this is a coup, they should just arrest those whining 9 Republicans.  That would send a good message to the rest of the Republicans.  This is a coup and if any stinkin Republican gets in the way, we should put them up against the wall....just like we would see in a real coup.

 

What?  Not happening?  Hmm, maybe we are witnessing a highly partisan, fully constitutional, political impeachment process and not a coup?  Just a thought

 

The coup has been ongoing since 2017 -- and hasn't been done in broad daylight because they know the people do not support it. Doing it out in the open would lead to the complete unraveling of the country into sectarian violence. 

 

...And you still didn't answer me earlier. Do you, Bob, still believe that Russia and Trump worked together to steal the 2016 election?

[Warren Zevon]

2 minutes ago, Bob in Mich said:

 

Coups don't need to follow any rules.  If this is a coup, they should just arrest those whining 9 Republicans.  That would send a good message to the rest of the Republicans.  This is a coup and if any stinkin Republican gets in the way, we should put them up against the wall....just like we would see in a real coup.

 

What?  Not happening?  Hmm, maybe we are witnessing a highly partisan, fully constitutional, political impeachment process and not a coup?  Just a thought

 

Nah dude it's a coup you stinky pothead

[Deranged Rhino]

 

[Warren Zevon]

 

sectarian violence - they think you're stupid

[Westside]

1 minute ago, Gary Busey said:

 

sectarian violence - they think you're stupid

You are stupid.

[Deranged Rhino]

 

[Bob in Mich]

10 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

The coup has been ongoing since 2017 -- and hasn't been done in broad daylight because they know the people do not support it. Doing it out in the open would lead to the complete unraveling of the country into sectarian violence. 

 

...And you still didn't answer me earlier. Do you, Bob, still believe that Russia and Trump worked together to steal the 2016 election?

 

Just stop with the coup talk.  It is incorrect as well as inflammatory and you know that.   As I just pointed out, why would coup leaders be following any rules?  They wouldn't.  Power is taken without an impeachment process in a real coup.  In addition, this current inquiry surrounds Trumps actions in 2019.

 

There are some less stable folks around here, ahem TYTT, that could be convinced this is an actual takeover and so convinced that he needs to gun down his neighbors.

[Deranged Rhino]

Just now, Bob in Mich said:

 

Just stop with the coup talk.  It is incorrect as well as inflammatory and you know that.   

 

It's not inaccurate. It's exactly what's been unfolding. 

 

And the proof is Trump/Russia. The entire story was fiction. It was created by the USIC, who then coordinated with their media assets to push a disinformation campaign on the American people. 

 

When that failed -- and it did, as it's been proven it was 100% entirely unfounded -- they moved on to the next manufactured "constitutional crisis". 

 

It's literally the same people who just got exposed as liars about Trump committing treason who are now pushing Trump/Ukraine. 

 

My question to you, which you keep dodging, is why do you continue to believe people who lied to your face for three years about Trump/Russia? Don't you at least have to take a moment and question their authenticity? Or do you still believe that Trump/Russia was real -- despite the evidence showing it was not?

 

The alternative to NOT talking about the coup is to sit back and let it happen. That's not my style. I care too much about the country to let unelected spooks overturn a legal election simply because they did not agree with the choice the people made. And to be clear, I didn't vote for Trump. It's not about Trump.

 

It's about right and wrong. 

 

[Bob in Mich]

24 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

It's not inaccurate. It's exactly what's been unfolding. 

 

And the proof is Trump/Russia. The entire story was fiction. It was created by the USIC, who then coordinated with their media assets to push a disinformation campaign on the American people. 

 

When that failed -- and it did, as it's been proven it was 100% entirely unfounded -- they moved on to the next manufactured "constitutional crisis". 

 

It's literally the same people who just got exposed as liars about Trump committing treason who are now pushing Trump/Ukraine. 

 

My question to you, which you keep dodging, is why do you continue to believe people who lied to your face for three years about Trump/Russia? Don't you at least have to take a moment and question their authenticity? Or do you still believe that Trump/Russia was real -- despite the evidence showing it was not?

 

The alternative to NOT talking about the coup is to sit back and let it happen. That's not my style. I care too much about the country to let unelected spooks overturn a legal election simply because they did not agree with the choice the people made. And to be clear, I didn't vote for Trump. It's not about Trump.

 

It's about right and wrong. 

 

Pretty much everyone from the USIC that you claimed was in on this 2016/2017 conspiracy is gone.  There is a whole new set of people in those key positions that you claimed were corrupt in 'framing' Trump back then.  Gone are Brennan, Clapper, Comey, McCabe, Rosenstein, Baker, Page, Strzok, etc, etc.  How are these same people still controlling power?  The people getting Trump in trouble today, not counting Trump himself, are all different....but wait....they are all in on it too?  Amiright?

 

Here's another possibility.  Trump continues to ignore the law concerning foreign involvement in his campaigns as he has always done.  See his statements about China investigating, Ukraine investigating, The Stephanopolous interview.   Is that a possibility or are you too myopic to consider that?

 

I am not going around again with you on Trump-Russia.  I told you what I think there repeatedly and am not starting down that hole.  Here, this bbc article sums up my take pretty well.  Read that and if you have any other related questions after reading that, keep them to yourself.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-48450534

Edited October 18, 2019 by Bob in Mich

[Deranged Rhino]

10 minutes ago, Bob in Mich said:

 

Pretty much everyone from the USIC that you claimed was in on this 2016/2017 conspiracy is gone.  There is a whole new set of people in those key positions that you claimed were corrupt in 'framing' Trump back then.  Gone are Brennan, Clapper, Comey, McCabe, Rosenstein, Baker, Page, Strzok, etc, etc.  How are these same people still controlling power?  The people getting Trump in trouble today, not counting Trump himself, are all different....but wait....they are all in on too?  Amiright?

 

Here's another possibility.  Trump continues to ignore the law concerning foreign involvement in his campaigns as he has always done.  See his statements about China investigating, Ukraine investigating, The Stephanopolous interview.   Is that a possibility or are you too myopic consider that?

 

 

You're exposing how little you understand about how the USIC works, and what happened in 2015-2017. That's not me trying to attack you or belittle you, it's me being honest. The people you listed were actively trying to rig the 2016 election -- and had the power to do it. They failed, and spent the transition period building a series of "insurance plans" which they then detonated into a full blown coup. Not to mention, most of the bad actors were not gone in 2017 -- they remained through most of 2018. 

 

But when they left (were fired for cause), where did all those people now you mentioned go again? Right, to work as media spox... and who, in turn, are trotted out anytime the media wishes to throw gas on the fire to "analyze" the president's actions. Those same people who we know were lying about Trump/Russia are now the "experts" on all intel matters in the major media complex.

 

Do you think that's a coincidence?  

 

This is an information war, first and foremost. 

 

And here's proof -- you still won't even answer the simple question about your own opinion. It's not a trap. It's a gauge as to where you are right now. Do you, Bob, still believe that Trump actively worked with Russian intelligence assets to steal the 2016 election or not? 

 

It's a simple question... 

Edited October 18, 2019 by Deranged Rhino

[snafu]

3 hours ago, B-Man said:

 

Iowa 2020: Just 7% call impeachment ‘important.

 

That's why impeachment IS important, to some.

It is the entire 2020 election, unless something else comes along.

 

 

[row_33]

24 minutes ago, snafu said:

 

That's why impeachment IS important, to some.

It is the entire 2020 election, unless something else comes along.

 

 

 

as always, having a decent job is what the 2020 election is all about

 

 

[Bob in Mich]

11 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

 

You're exposing how little you understand about how the USIC works, and what happened in 2015-2017. That's not me trying to attack you or belittle you, it's me being honest. The people you listed were actively trying to rig the 2016 election -- and had the power to do it. They failed, and spent the transition period building a series of "insurance plans" which they then detonated into a full blown coup. Not to mention, most of the bad actors were not gone in 2017 -- they remained through most of 2018. 

 

But when they left (were fired for cause), where did all those people now you mentioned go again? Right, to work as media spox... and who, in turn, are trotted out anytime the media wishes to throw gas on the fire to "analyze" the president's actions. Those same people who we know were lying about Trump/Russia are now the "experts" on all intel matters in the major media complex.

 

Do you think that's a coincidence?  

 

This is an information war, first and foremost. 

 

And here's proof -- you still won't even answer the simple question about your own opinion. It's not a trap. It's a gauge as to where you are right now. Do you, Bob, still believe that Trump actively worked with Russian intelligence assets to steal the 2016 election or not? 

 

It's a simple question... 

 

Look, regardless of your 2016/2017 conspiracy theory, this is about new Presidential possible misdeeds.  You only need to listen to the President and his people.  Many have admitted this wrongdoing on video.  Not a single media person needs to assist this story so please forget that angle.  It does not apply here.  And again, these admitted actions were in 2019.

 

And, before you begin backpedaling and tell me there was nothing wrong on that phone call, why would they repeatedly insist on the denial for so long and why would they have tried to squirrel away the original Ukraine call transcript?  Yeah, the answers could be because of a grand conspiracy by hundreds or it could be that Trump is not as innocent as you think. 

 

I guess we should let investigations continue and follow the evidence.  Hopefully, wrong doers, regardless of party, get justice.

[Warren Zevon]

 

[DC Tom]

1 minute ago, Gary Busey said:

 

 

I hear a lot of "a line was crossed," but no actual definition of what that line is.  

[Westside]

1 minute ago, Gary Busey said:

 

The faux outrage is so damn amusing!!

[Rob's House]

3 minutes ago, Gary Busey said:

 

 

Oh sh!t. If we've lost John Kasich we've lost America. 

[KRC]

3 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

I hear a lot of "a line was crossed," but no actual definition of what that line is.  

 

It's an Obama line. You know, one that doesn't actually exist.

[DC Tom]

Just now, KRC said:

 

It's an Obama line. You know, one that doesn't actually exist.

 

Oh, you mean the one that does exist, but when it's crossed we defer to the Russians?  

[Warren Zevon]

 

[Albwan]

3 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

Don't need any of them now, Mulvany is the new star whistleblower.

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

4 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

This is all he's got: 

 

 

...Hillary and Smitten Mitt should have a commiserate party together.....joint sulking....yet refuse to go away......should BOTH be the same result from my morning American Standard flush.....gone down the drain.......

[3rdnlng]

WTF PEOPLE, JUST LIKE IN THE RUSSIAN COLLUSION CASE THERE IS NOTHING ILLEGAL ABOUT COLLUSION ALONE. A PERSON WOULD HAVE TO DO SOMETHING ILLEGAL IN CONJUNCTION WITH SOMEONE ELSE FOR IT TO BE ILLEGAL.THERE IS NOTHING INHERENTLY ILLEGAL ABOUT QUID PRO QUO EITHER. IF YOU BOUGHT GASOLINE TODAY YOU WERE INVOLVED IN A QUID PRO QUO. SAME WITH LUNCH. IF YOU BOUGHT A BJ THEN YOU WERE INVOLVED IN AN ILLEGAL QUID PRO QUO.

[Warren Zevon]

clown

 

unhinged clown

Edited October 18, 2019 by Gary Busey

[Deranged Rhino]

2 hours ago, Bob in Mich said:

 

Look, regardless of your 2016/2017 conspiracy theory...

 

Its funny that you won’t answer a simple question about your opinion. 

 

How do you define a conspiracy theory? Is it the belief in something without evidence to back it up? Because if so, you might want to consider the fact you are hiding your own conspiratorial beliefs. 

[Bob in Mich]

On 10/16/2019 at 2:31 PM, Bob in Mich said:

 

I used the analogy to make the point.  If the game has been fixed with the refs, playing again is not going to decide fairly.  If one party is cheating during the election, the results would be tainted.

 

One final time, I disagree with your take on Trump/Russia as you know all too well.  I am not getting on that hamster wheel with you again. There was a lot of improper activity by the Trump campaign, just not enough in Mueller's opinion to convict Trump of conspiracy.  There was clearly obstruction of justice.  Without Barr's protection it could have easily gone a different way last spring.  And just to restate, thinking that hundreds in the IC and press are involved in a vast conspiracy that if discovered could result in their death, is still as silly as ever.

 

I disagree too on your take about a House vote.  I guess we will see but I think they will vote to impeach Trump and will send it to the Republican controlled Senate where he will be acquitted.  As you mention about the House members, I would like the Senators to go on the record.  If in the future, Trump is proven to be guilty of several crimes/misdeeds, I like the idea of having a record of who wished to put Trump above the law.

 

I read somewhere that this is like  'The Boy Who Cried Wolf'.  You claim that anyone that thought Trump was guilty of conspiring with the Russians is a liar, not simply mistaken, but a liar.  They cannot now be believed, right?  The problem though is that every investigator of Trump is in that group.  You are thus advocating for no oversight for Trump.  Even you must see that would place him above the law.  Let me ask you, what current Trump investigator would you believe?  Name names please.

 

The primary point of that Boy-Wolf story was that liars never win.  At least that was what I took away as a child.  Folks seem to ignore though that although the Boy lied, in the end the sheep got eaten because the others now ignored his cries of help.  The Wolf was really there that next time but the others never even looked.

 

Look DR, I am trying to not be insulting but you are making it tough. 

 

I HAVE TOLD YOU MY OPINION ON THAT SEVERAL TIMES ALREADY.

 

Remember this post above?  That is it.  Or, if you want expansion, read that BBC article I linked.

[Deranged Rhino]

3 minutes ago, Bob in Mich said:

 

Look DR, I am trying to not be insulting but you are making it tough. 

 

I HAVE TOLD YOU MY OPINION ON THAT SEVERAL TIMES ALREADY.

 

Remember this post above?  That is it.  Or, if you want expansion, read that BBC article I linked.

 

So you still believe Trump and Russia worked together to steal the election -- even though several probes and committees, including Mueller, proved this did not happen? 

 

That's still your opinion?