The Impeachment Trial of President Donald J. Trump

[Nanker]

Nany says... Game ON!

 

[row_33]

stuff like this should be for serious and proven matters

 

a silly game of innuendo defeats the purpose and just makes the GOP steely to return the favour 10-fold

 

 

[Koko78]

Well, at least Trump will have a unified government in 2021 now. Can finally get down to business.

Edited December 5, 2019 by Koko78

[Nanker]

I hope Cocaine Mitch doesn’t take it up until June of next year. 

[row_33]

stupider impeachment than Morley Seinfeld's

[IDBillzFan]

It's a good thing Kamala Harris has freed up her time.

 

Well done, Dems. I didn't think you'd be stupid enough to do this...yet here we are. Thanks for everything.

 

Sincerely,

Trump/Pence 2020 Re-election Campaign

[Koko78]

14 minutes ago, Nanker said:

I hope Cocaine Mitch doesn’t take it up until June of next year. 

 

Or drag it out through the primary season. You know, by scheduling trial days to occur when the Democrats have debates planned, etc.

 

Be a real shame if the push by all these states to have early primaries blew up in their faces.

[Capco]

"Never before, in the history of the republic, have we been forced to consider the conduct of a president who appears to have solicited personal, political favors from a foreign government."

 

Is it that Trump supporters simply think the above is bogus/hot air?  Or do they just not care and turn a blind eye even if they think he did do what he is being accused of, perhaps by citing other presidents who they think did the same or worse?  

 

I'd hope it's mostly the former.  

[Warren Zevon]

38 minutes ago, Nanker said:

I hope Cocaine Mitch doesn’t take it up until June of next year. 

 

Me too - more time for the courts go through all the appeals regarding his finances. 

 

There's a reason Trump and his minions keep screaming IMPEACHMENT BY CHRISTMAS! 

 

Trump wants it to happen ASAP

[DC Tom]

25 minutes ago, Capco said:

"Never before, in the history of the republic, have we been forced to consider the conduct of a president who appears to have solicited personal, political favors from a foreign government."

 

Is it that Trump supporters simply think the above is bogus/hot air?  Or do they just not care and turn a blind eye even if they think he did do what he is being accused of, perhaps by citing other presidents who they think did the same or worse?  

 

I'd hope it's mostly the former.  

 

Trump supporters believe the latter.  Sane people who are paying attention know it's the former.

[Warren Zevon]

 

Desperation nation

[Capco]

13 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

Sane people who are paying attention know it's the former.

 

Well now you're jumping the gun a bit yourself.  Unless you think the Democrats intentionally picked insane witnesses.  

 

At Wednesday’s session, three legal experts called by Democrats said impeachment was merited.

 

Noah Feldman, a Harvard Law School professor, said he considered it clear that the president’s conduct met the definition of “high crimes and misdemeanors.” Said Michael Gerhardt, a University of North Carolina law professor, “If what we’re talking about is not impeachable … then nothing is impeachable.”

 

The only Republican witness, Jonathan Turley, a law professor at George Washington University, dissented from the other legal experts. He said the Democrats were bringing a “slipshod impeachment” case against the president, but he didn’t excuse Trump’s behavior.

 

“It is not wrong because President Trump is right,” Turley said. “A case for impeachment could be made, but it cannot be made on this record.”

 

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/pelosi-gives-approval-for-drafting-impeachment-articles-against-trump

 

Idk, but I think it would be pretty difficult to get a job as a law professor at Harvard if you were insane.  Just a hunch though.  

Edited December 5, 2019 by Capco

[SoCal Deek]

So now we’ll have to pass the impeachment to find out what’s in it. Nancy is on a roll here. (She’s just made herself into a laughing stock punch line for all of history to come.)

[Foxx]

5 minutes ago, Capco said:

 

Well now you're jumping the gun a bit yourself.  Unless you think the Democrats intentionally picked insane witnesses.  

 

At Wednesday’s session, three legal experts called by Democrats said impeachment was merited.

 

Noah Feldman, a Harvard Law School professor, said he considered it clear that the president’s conduct met the definition of “high crimes and misdemeanors.” Said Michael Gerhardt, a University of North Carolina law professor, “If what we’re talking about is not impeachable … then nothing is impeachable.”

 

The only Republican witness, Jonathan Turley, a law professor at George Washington University, dissented from the other legal experts. He said the Democrats were bringing a “slipshod impeachment” case against the president, but he didn’t excuse Trump’s behavior.

 

“It is not wrong because President Trump is right,” Turley said. “A case for impeachment could be made, but it cannot be made on this record.”

 

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/pelosi-gives-approval-for-drafting-impeachment-articles-against-trump

 

Idk, but I think it would be pretty difficult to get a job as a law professor at Harvard if you were insane.  Just a hunch though.  

quick question for you.... do you think the insane think they're insane or sane?

[Capco]

1 minute ago, Foxx said:

quick question for you.... do you think the insane think they're insane or sane?

 

As a matter of fact I know a paranoid schizophrenic who is fully aware that he's insane.  Some do know and some don't.  No need to paint with such broad strokes.  

[Foxx]

2 minutes ago, Capco said:

 

As a matter of fact I know a paranoid schizophrenic who is fully aware that he's insane.  Some do know and some don't.  No need to paint with such broad strokes.  

ummm.. so again... who is the one painting with a broad brush?

[Deranged Rhino]

They went to “Harvard” so they’re automatically our betters, incapable of being partisan hacks. 
 

Holy Schiff what an appeal to authority. 

[Capco]

1 minute ago, Foxx said:

ummm.. so again... who is the one painting with a broad brush?

 

The person who asked a question trying to characterize all insane people.

[DC Tom]

1 minute ago, Deranged Rhino said:

They went to “Harvard” so they’re automatically our betters, incapable of being partisan hacks. 
 

Holy Schiff what an appeal to authority. 

 

I'm routinely thankful I chose not to go to Harvard.

[Deranged Rhino]

No one who attended Harvard ever lied! 
 

They’re scholars! And our betters! 
 

 

[Foxx]

Just now, Capco said:

 

The person who asked a question trying to characterize all insane people.

sure, not the one who implied that Dems wouldn't pick insane witnesses... gotcha.

[Capco]

1 minute ago, Foxx said:

sure, not the one who implied that Dems wouldn't pick insane witnesses... gotcha.

 

So you really think those three law professors are insane?  

[Deranged Rhino]

Just now, Capco said:

 

So you really think those three law professors are insane?  

They are entirely irrelevant to the issue at hand. They offer nothing worthwhile. They weren’t objective. They weren’t fact witnesses. 
 

They were trotted out on stage with a script written by the democrats specifically so people like you would be blinded by their academic credentials and not look any further. 
 

It worked on you. That should alarm you. 

[Buffalo_Gal]

1 hour ago, Capco said:

"Never before, in the history of the republic, have we been forced to consider the conduct of a president who appears to have solicited personal, political favors from a foreign government."

 

Is it that Trump supporters simply think the above is bogus/hot air?  Or do they just not care and turn a blind eye even if they think he did do what he is being accused of, perhaps by citing other presidents who they think did the same or worse?  

 

I'd hope it's mostly the former.  

Sure, why not impeach a guy for what his predecessor did. Seems smart.  ?‍♀️

Meh, all the former administration's graft, pay-for-play, and spying will now come to light. Well played Democrats, well played. 

 

[Warren Zevon]

Everyone knows the 4 witnesses were not fact witnesses. 

 

A medical examiner called to the stand in a murder case is not a fact witness.

 

Why is the right gaslighting the public with this lame narrative?

Edited December 5, 2019 by Gary Busey

[Foxx]

7 minutes ago, Capco said:

 

So you really think those three law professors are insane?  

more to my point... the Dems are the ones who are insane. if you look at this whole charade objectively, it is the only logical conclusion.

 

7 minutes ago, Capco said:

 

So you really think those three law professors are insane?  

to answer your question directly here, do i think they are insane, no. but i do think #TDS is very real and could be clinically considered a 'condition'.

Edited December 5, 2019 by Foxx

[Warren Zevon]

10 minutes ago, Foxx said:

ummm.. so again... who is the one painting with a broad brush?

 

Just now, Foxx said:

more to my point... the Dems are the ones who are insane. if you look at this whole charade objectively, it is the only logical conclusion.

 

https://news.gallup.com/poll/15370/party-affiliation.aspx

[dubs]

26 minutes ago, Capco said:

Idk, but I think it would be pretty difficult to get a job as a law professor at Harvard if you were insane.  Just a hunch though.  

 

When the institution you’re applying for a job at is insane, and the people hiring you are insane, insanity is a prerequisite. 

[Capco]

3 minutes ago, Foxx said:

more to my point... the Dems are the ones who are insane. if you look at this whole charade objectively, it is the only logical conclusion.

 

to answer your question directly here, do i think they are insane, no. but i do think #TDS is very real and could be clinically considered a 'condition'.

 

Right I got that.  All good.  

 

This whole tangent on insanity is DC Tom's fault anyway.  Let's just blame him.  

Edited December 5, 2019 by Capco

[RochesterRob]

4 minutes ago, Gary Busey said:

Everyone knows the 4 witnesses were not fact witnesses. 

 

A medical examiner called to the stand in a murder case is not a fact witness.

 

Why is the left gaslighting the public with this lame narrative?

FIFY.

[DC Tom]

3 minutes ago, Gary Busey said:

Everyone knows the 4 witnesses were not fact witnesses. 

 

A medical examiner called to the stand in a murder case is not a fact witness.

 

Why is the right gaslighting the public with this lame narrative?

 

CNN, the Washintgon Post, the NYT, the LA Times, MSNBC, NBC, CBS, ABC, Politico, The Hill, USA Today, NPR, Vox, The Atlantic, and Bloomberg are all calling them "witnesses."

 

Who's gaslighting whom?

[Foxx]

1 minute ago, Gary Busey said:

 

 

https://news.gallup.com/poll/15370/party-affiliation.aspx

what exactly is the point you are attempting to make here? that party affiliation has remained pretty static through the time period looked at? 

[Deranged Rhino]

9 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

CNN, the Washintgon Post, the NYT, the LA Times, MSNBC, NBC, CBS, ABC, Politico, The Hill, USA Today, NPR, Vox, The Atlantic, and Bloomberg are all calling them "witnesses."

 

Who's gaslighting whom?

up in down. 

 

Something the TDS sufferers have yet to figure out. And it’s almost too late for them to realize they’ve been had. 

[Buffalo_Gal]

The real question is; how long does RBG have to live?

This can't all be about the OIG report and the last administration's graft and spying as it will all come out in the Senate. There has to be more. A claim that a SC seat cannot be filled while a President is being impeached? Then, when the impeachment trial is over trying to say "election year so no SC seat can be filled"? The election year one I'd expect Mitch to say LOLGFY, but while under impeachment?  Think he'd still go forward with a SC nomination? 

Edited December 5, 2019 by Buffalo_Gal

[Capco]

42 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

They are entirely irrelevant to the issue at hand. They offer nothing worthwhile. They weren’t objective. They weren’t fact witnesses. 
 

They were trotted out on stage with a script written by the democrats specifically so people like you would be blinded by their academic credentials and not look any further. 
 

It worked on you. That should alarm you. 

 

36 minutes ago, dubs said:

When the institution you’re applying for a job at is insane, and the people hiring you are insane, insanity is a prerequisite. 

 

See, rhetoric like this I find concerning.  The higher institutions of education in this country are one of its central pillars, on par with the military.  There's a reason why people around the world come here in droves to attend our universities.  

 

On some level it feels like people are being conditioned to discredit experts simply because those experts have conclusions they disagree with.  Expertise and specialized roles are very important to a high functioning society.  No one single person can become an expert in every field, and this idea that any person can do all their own research and come to more accurate conclusions than people who have focused on this one single field for a lifetime is for the birds. 

 

You can't expect every single person to be a doctor and lawyer and physicist and nutritionist and farmer and hunter and mechanic and plumber and tailor and shipwright and the hundreds of other specialized roles that feed off of each other.  That's why we lean on other people's expertise on a daily basis.  Scientific advancement would come to a crawl without collaboration between researchers, for example.  

 

But to lean on experts requires trust, and that trust is being actively eroded from without while those very same people eroding that trust claim that it is the institution itself that is eroding from within. 

 

If we need to have a conversation about reforming parts of higher education, that's fine.  But what we're seeing instead is a wholesale dismantling of the respect and trust in that institution.  That's what should alarm you.  

Edited December 5, 2019 by Capco

[Deranged Rhino]

Just now, Capco said:

 

 

See, rhetoric like this I find concerning.  The higher institutions of education in this country are one of its central pillars, on par with the military.  

You are exposing yourself to be a fool with the above statement. 
 

That is laughably ignorant of reality. 

[Foxx]

there is a difference between being educated and being schooled.

[Deranged Rhino]

1 minute ago, Capco said:

 

 

 

But to lean on experts requires trust, and that trust is being actively eroded from without while those very same people eroding that trust claim that it is the institution itself that is eroding from within. 

I am a highly educated person w an advanced degree. I went to good schools, I know first hand what they are like and who they produce. The trust erosion you’re talking about was entirely earned due to THEIR ***** ups. Not the other way around. 
 

The point here is these witnesses are not experts in ANYTHING relevant to the impeachment case being built. Not a single thing. 
 

They were trotted out to read a script and blind you with their academic credentials — not to lend their expertise on this topic. 
 

Stop appealing to authority and start thinking for yourself. It’s the only way to survive The (did)information war we are all combatants in at present. 

[DC Tom]

8 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

You are exposing yourself to be a fool with the above statement. 
 

That is laughably ignorant of reality. 

 

No, it actually isn't.  The modern university system was built on military cooperation, so it's entirely accurate to call them a pillar of the nation on par with the military.

 

Probably not what he meant, though.

[Capco]

9 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

No, it actually isn't.  The modern university system was built on military cooperation, so it's entirely accurate to call them a pillar of the nation on par with the military.

 

Probably not what he meant, though.

 

West Point and the Army Corps of Engineers were instrumental to the building of infrastructure in the early days of the nation.  Without those engineers the nation develops much slower.  You also saw a huge boom as a result of R&D during WWII.  

 

I mean I was just quoting someone else when I said that it was a pillar on par with the military.  Not even an original idea or anything.  

Edited December 5, 2019 by Capco