The Impeachment Trial of President Donald J. Trump

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

3 hours ago, 3rdnlng said:

This is spot on. Back when we were debating the ACA before its inception I had two major objections to it. (1) It ignored the "Law of Large Numbers" which is the basis for all insurance. (2) The people implementing the ACA were incompetent. 

Unfortunately, some people are conditioned to believe that cheap is good, health care should cost next to nothing, and the the health care companies call all the shots.  And by the way, I’m not pro-health insurance companies, they are part of the problem as well. 
 

At the same time, some of those people see tremendous value in the latest iPhone, internet service, jail house ink and the latest car with all the gadgets.  
 

Politicians know that and treat the health care system accordingly. By the nature of the process nothing can happen that is outside the regulation and/or pricing structure allowed by regulation. At least, not without penalty.  Yet, many want to turn it over to the regulators to work their magic.  Dumb, dumb dumb.
 

 

I am going to go out on a limb here and say there is so much money going through the system that reasonably priced, catastrophic insurance plan with reasonable out of pockets—-regulated reasonably, is certainly doable.  It would have to start with elimination of the taxpayer funded plans extended to public employees, redefining what reasonable cost is, and that does not appear likely to ever happen.

[Golden Goat]

Well done by Susan Collins!

[B-Man]

1 hour ago, Golden Goat said:

Well done by Susan Collins!

 

 

For those who didn't know, 

 

She announced that she was voting for acquittal on both counts.

 

The democrats had every chance to try and prove that the POTUS broke the law, they could not....................just sour grapes.

 

 

.

[Foxx]

4 minutes ago, B-Man said:

 

 

For those who didn't know, 

 

She announced that she was voting for acquittal on both counts.

 

The democrats had every chance to try and prove that the POTUS broke the law, they could not....................just sour grapes.

 

 

.

i've been looking for the clip but haven't been able to find it just yet.

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

3 minutes ago, B-Man said:

 

 

For those who didn't know, 

 

She announced that she was voting for acquittal on both counts.

 

The democrats had every chance to try and prove that the POTUS broke the law, they could not....................just sour grapes.

 

 

.

...WHOA!!....a.MAJOR time out.......Photo Op Chuck the Schmuck Schumer said, "we will NOT accept the Senate's acquittal of President Trump"......yet another one of our NYS turds......

[Golden Goat]

20 minutes ago, Foxx said:

i've been looking for the clip but haven't been able to find it just yet.

 

 

[Bob in Mich]

21 hours ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

We've reached the end here sir. 

 

I'm truly sorry to hear about the medical issues and health care coverage. I think you know that already.  What I can offer in that regard is only that everything that happened there was part of the over-managed, over-regulated system set in place by the politicians in the state where you receive care. Everything--everything starts with the state and its requirements.it always has been that way. There are obvious problems with our health care system, but at the end of the day the total disregard for actuarial science is where it all starts. You can't solve a problem that involves both people AND mathematics by creating a new system that ignores the math totally. 

 

I acknowledge health  care seems to be a non-issue at this point. Could focus on proving he's not a traitor for 3 years be part of the  challenge? Could that be part or the dem strategy? You've seen the House and Senate and where there attentions have been focused. 

 

You are correct--the last part was tough to follow. Impossible in fact. It belies virtually everything we know now about the Russia investigation.  Could people believe that it was a big innocent misunderstanding and Trump is guilty in spite of what came out, or that Comey and Brennan are the true heroes of the take, and that the FISA "mistakes" actually represent the truth? 

 

Diabetics skip insulin shots. People with heart conditions allow themselves to become obese. Pat's fans think the cheaters don't cheat. Of course people will think that way. 

 

I'm not one of those people. 

 

Len, I agree with your take that most of this has been discussed but in the spirit of the last word......

 

Healthcare - just seems that the Dems and Repubs differ on the availability of healthcare to poor people.  Even for those people that cannot afford it, Dems have been aspiring to provide some level of care before the sick/poor drop over on their way to an emergency room.  Repubs seem content with the current employer based care.  The ACA had several big issues but it appeared the plan was taking a first swipe at covering all....and personally, the pre-existing condition coverage was important to me. 

 

Any legislated program of that size is going to need fixes as we see the problems in practice.  If I recall, the Repubs have blocked improvement attempts and are well on the way to undoing it.  I have no problem with anyone that wants to point out the flaws with the ACA.  Philosophically, I disagree with those that are content with the pre-ACA med insurance practices. 

 

Funny how you so vehemently opposed my description of what happened with Trump/Russia.  As most know, I think there was enough actual smoke there to investigate but that is not my point here.  I was trying to lay out your side of what happened and somehow you saw something totally different in my question.  For discussion, I was allowing that there was a deep state plot and that they totally framed a saintly Trump.  BRB, gotta go puke....lol

 

So, bearing in mind that I am attempting, for discussion purposes, to agree that some deep state FBI/CIA types manufactured the evidence to produce the above mentioned smoke, how can you blame the average person for believing the story the deep state put together?

 

This is the original text from above:

Now, this is tougher to follow.....If there was a subset of FBI and/or CIA  officials that were behind the supposed 'coup plot' in 2016, they manipulated/manufactured the whole tale that Trump was involved with Russians to get himself elected.  They made him look like a possible traitor, is that basically correct?

 

If that is what happened, how can you blame people, posters, politicians, or even media outlets for seeing the publicly available evidence and concluding that he might, in fact, be involved with the Russians.  If what we saw on the surface was true, not investigating would be irresponsible.  I don't agree that Mueller produced nothing.  I don't agree that every bit of Trump-Russia evidence was innocent or manufactured but if that is the story you believe, concluding that everyone that bought the story was hateful or unreasonably out to get Donnie, is not really logical.

 

I won't be hurt if you are talked out on these issues.  Reply or not, I will manage.

[Foxx]

https://twitter.com/verykate45/status/1224919008618647552

 

***************************************************************************

 

1 hour ago, Bob in Mich said:

...Now, this is tougher to follow.....If there was a subset of FBI and/or CIA  officials that were behind the supposed 'coup plot' in 2016, they manipulated/manufactured the whole tale that Trump was involved with Russians to get himself elected.  They made him look like a possible traitor, is that basically correct?

 

If that is what happened, how can you blame people, posters, politicians, or even media outlets for seeing the publicly available evidence and concluding that he might, in fact, be involved with the Russians.  If what we saw on the surface was true, not investigating would be irresponsible.  I don't agree that Mueller produced nothing.  I don't agree that every bit of Trump-Russia evidence was innocent or manufactured but if that is the story you believe, concluding that everyone that bought the story was hateful or unreasonably out to get Donnie, is not really logical....

the only way one could even possibly come away with the impression that Trump colluded with the Russians is because they took what the propaganda press stuffed down their throats everyday. had one had the temerity to do even just a small dive into the facts that were readily available, they would have understood that it was a false narrative.

Edited February 5, 2020 by Foxx

[Deranged Rhino]

49 minutes ago, Bob in Mich said:

Funny how you so vehemently opposed my description of what happened with Trump/Russia. 

 

He didn't oppose it. Reality and facts opposed your description of what happened with Trump Russia. 

 

You got had -- and you're too partisan (or is it dim?) to know it. 

 

49 minutes ago, Bob in Mich said:

 

As most know, I think there was enough actual smoke there to investigate but that is not my point here.

 

The IG disagreed. As did every honest lawman and intelligence official in the IC/DOJ. 

 

You got played. Because you're too cowardly to think for yourself. 

 

49 minutes ago, Bob in Mich said:

 

For discussion, I was allowing that there was a deep state plot and that they totally framed a saintly Trump.  BRB, gotta go puke....lol

 

Funny how now proven facts make your body puke. It's like an unhealthy eater who suddenly eats healthy and it disagrees with him. You've been feasting on lies for so long that you don't know up from down. 

 

The entire upper echelon of the FBI and DOJ under Obama were referred for CRIMINAL investigation by the Obama appointed IG. That's factual. That happened because there was a plot against Trump. 

 

And you supported it -- and continue to support it -- because you're a useless idiot and they played you, Bob. 

 

49 minutes ago, Bob in Mich said:

So, bearing in mind that I am attempting, for discussion purposes, to agree that some deep state FBI/CIA types manufactured the evidence to produce the above mentioned smoke, how can you blame the average person for believing the story the deep state put together?

 

Unlike most average people, you had access to the counter-story (and actual facts) for several years and you ignored it. 

 

So yes, people should call you out, should make fun of you, should belittle you for refusing the truth and facts when they were presented. 

 

It's entirely deserved. You earned it, Bob. Revel in it. 

 

 

Edited February 5, 2020 by Deranged Rhino

[Deranged Rhino]

Congrats, Senator Sessions.

 

 

[B-Man]

 

 

WELL, THAT’S WHAT THEY DO: 

 

Alan Dershowitz: Democrats are lying about my argument. 

 

But it’s okay, people have already forgotten what they said in light of the Iowa debacle.

 

 

 

.

[Bob in Mich]

53 minutes ago, Foxx said:

 

 

the only way one could even possibly come away with the impression that Trump colluded with the Russians is because they took what the propaganda press stuffed down their throats everyday. had one had the temerity to do even just a small dive into the facts that were readily available, they would have understood that it was a false narrative.

 

many were reading and watching and concluded there was plenty enough smoke there to look into.  I maintain there was.  Include Trump's words and attempted obstruction, and it looked even more likely that he was hiding something Russia related.  The negative views of Trump are not simply due to 'orangemanbad' or simply hate or refusal to accept Hillary lost or laziness, as is the refrain here.  Suspicion was well warranted.

 

I think it is asking a lot to expect people were going to discard their traditional news and intelligence sources in favor of online douchebags, like DR.  In fact I did not have DR on ignore back then as I had yet to realize what an a-hole he would become.  I was trying to understand his 'reasoning'.  His theories were full of logical leaps and logical errors and he actually began his descent into online stalking and harassment over this issue, when I pointed out the logic problems.

 

To remind, the point I was trying to discuss with Len was that if one totally buys into the deep state /coup theory, the worst they should be allowed to claim is that Trump detractors  were duped.  Instead there is this narrative he pushes that 'they' have just hate him and wanted to get him all along and for no good reason. 

 

To be honest it was something I should have asked him in a PM.  I don't really wish to rehash with those I view as less reasonable and highly combative.  It was just a hypothetical to pass the time.....yesterday.  Today I am less interested in posting.  So, reply or not.  Up to you

[Deranged Rhino]

8 minutes ago, Bob in Mich said:

 

many were reading and watching and concluded there was plenty enough smoke there to look into. 

 

Except for the FBI, DOJ, and IC -- they concluded very early on (January at the latest of 2017) that there was nothing there. More than nothing there, they knew that it was purposefully false information being pushed for partisan/political reasons. 

 

9 minutes ago, Bob in Mich said:

I maintain there was. 

 

That's a fine position to hold in January of 2017 as a citizen. 

 

It's a stupid position to hold in February of 2020 with all that's come out since. 

 

(But that's on brand for you).

 

9 minutes ago, Bob in Mich said:

 Include Trump's words and attempted obstruction, and it looked even more likely that he was hiding something Russia related. 

 

What obstruction? Trump gave all the documents and witnesses requested by Mueller without evoking privilege for years. Even though Mueller knew the day he took the job that there was nothing to the central charges. 

 

You're exposing how little you know (again) and how much of the partisan brainwashing you've accepted as truth. 

 

11 minutes ago, Bob in Mich said:

The negative views of Trump are not simply due to 'orangemanbad' or simply hate or refusal to accept Hillary lost or laziness, as is the refrain here.  Suspicion was well warranted.

 

It was. 

 

It's not now. 

 

Unless you are addled with TDS and complete, dishonest, useless idiot for the partisan establishment. Which you are. 

 

11 minutes ago, Bob in Mich said:

 

I think it is asking a lot to expect people were going to discard their traditional news and intelligence sources in favor of online douchebags, like DR. 

 

No one asked that. No one. 

 

What was asked was to read primary source material, evidence, testimony and then think for yourself. 

 

Something you refused to do. Which is why you're so lost on this subject. That's your fault. No one elses. 

 

12 minutes ago, Bob in Mich said:

 

  In fact I did not have DR on ignore back then as I had yet to realize what an a-hole he would become.  I was trying to understand his 'reasoning'.  His theories were full of logical leaps and logical errors and he actually began his descent into online stalking and harassment over this issue, when I pointed out the logic problems.

 

You never pointed out any logical fallacies. You refused to read the evidence for yourself. 

 

Now we know I was proven right. You were proven wrong. Only thing is, you still think you're right because you're an intellectual midget with delusions of grandeur. 

 

13 minutes ago, Bob in Mich said:

 

To remind, the point I was trying to discuss with Len was that if one totally buys into the deep state /coup theory, the worst they should be allowed to claim is that Trump detractors  were duped.  Instead there is this narrative he pushes that 'they' have just hate him and wanted to get him all along and for no good reason. 

 

Not they. You. 

You refused, for years, the truth right under your nose. 

 

Now you're too far gone to even admit you were wrong. And you were wrong, Bob. All the way wrong. 

 

Still are. 

 

 

[Foxx]

29 minutes ago, Bob in Mich said:

 

many were reading and watching and concluded there was plenty enough smoke there to look into.  I maintain there was.  Include Trump's words and attempted obstruction, and it looked even more likely that he was hiding something Russia related.  The negative views of Trump are not simply due to 'orangemanbad' or simply hate or refusal to accept Hillary lost or laziness, as is the refrain here.  Suspicion was well warranted. ...

 

... To remind, the point I was trying to discuss with Len was that if one totally buys into the deep state /coup theory, the worst they should be allowed to claim is that Trump detractors  were duped.  Instead there is this narrative he pushes that 'they' have just hate him and wanted to get him all along and for no good reason. 

 

To be honest it was something I should have asked him in a PM.  I don't really wish to rehash with those I view as less reasonable and highly combative.  It was just a hypothetical to pass the time.....yesterday.  Today I am less interested in posting.  So, reply or not.  Up to you

again, the many who concluded there was enough smoke to warrant an investigation were played by the propaganda presstitutes. and those people who swallowed it whole, did so without question. as more and more information becomes available, daily at this point it seems, we are beginning to understand that it goes much deeper than just the propaganda wing of the establishment. that, at a minimum, it went into the upper echelons of the FBI, if not the CIA, other alphabet agencies and quite possibly, even the Ominstration. there is certainly enough circumstantial evidence that points to it originating in the Ominstration. to deny this while simultaneously stating that there was enough smoke to investigate Trump, is simply displaying a bias and quite possibly an ignorance of the facts on the ground.

 

your argument regarding 'attempted obstruction', i reject out of hand. there is a valid legal argument that goes to the idea that in order to obstruct something, one first needs to be guilty. of which, i happen to agree with for a multitude of reasons.

 

with the knowledge of hindsight that you now have, i have to ask you, why are you not outraged that they lied to you for well over three years? additionally, if one looks at the Democrats actions, it is very hard to come away from them and not understand that, 'they hate him'. when you have multitudes of Democrats as being on record stating that they were going to impeach him before he even took office, along with the subsequent refrain echoed throughout the Democrats narrative for the last 3 + years. again to say that they don't is, imo displaying a bias that is devoid of factual evidence.  

Edited February 5, 2020 by Foxx

[Bob in Mich]

19 minutes ago, Foxx said:

again, the many who concluded there was enough smoke to warrant an investigation were played by the propaganda presstitutes. and those people who swallowed it whole, did so without question. as more and more information becomes available, daily at this point it seems, we are beginning to understand that it goes much deeper than just the propaganda wing of the establishment. that, at a minimum, it went into the upper echelons of the FBI, if not the CIA, other alphabet agencies and quite possibly, even the Ominstration. there is certainly enough circumstantial evidence that points to it originating in the Ominstration. to deny this while simultaneously stating that there was enough smoke to investigate Trump, is simply displaying a bias and quite possibly an ignorance of the facts on the ground.

 

your argument regarding 'attempted obstruction', i reject out of hand. there is a valid legal argument that goes to the idea that in order to obstruct something, one first needs to be guilty. of which, i happen to agree with for a multitude of reasons.

 

with the knowledge of hindsight that you now have, i have to ask you, why are you not outraged that they lied to you for well over three years? additionally, if one looks at the Democrats actions, it is very hard to come away from them and not understand that, 'they hate him'. when you have multitudes of Democrats as being on record stating that they were going to impeach him before he even took office, along with the subsequent refrain echoed throughout the Democrats narrative for the last 3 + years. again to say that they don't is, imo displaying a bias that is devoid of factual evidence.  

 

Sort of agreeing with my initial point that the worst any coup claimant should make, was that many were duped.  Tough to understand how I am ignoring possible Oministration misconduct, when I keep repeating they should look into the alleged FISA abuse and to punish any wrongdoing.

 

That obstruction point of yours has a sort of logical hole too.  It seems people want to ignore the possibility that Trump may have assumed that Mueller was investigating things that he did not investigate, or that he would discover some wrongdoing that he did not.  He may have thought Mueller was going to discover some, say past tax fraud, when Mueller did not go there.  If he wanted to stop the investigation because he feared, say tax fraud charges, he may have wanted to obstruct the investigation even though in the end, Mueller did not investigate that issue.  That is an explanation of how obstruction could happen without Trump later being charged with conspiracy.

 

As far as those lying to me for three years.....First, let me repeat, I don't agree that news outlets were lying for three years.  The Dems in Congress, the reporters, the people, and Mueller should have been suspicious, and investigating Trumps actions were justified so, no, I am not outraged at them.  I guess as I just described, reporters work with traditional sources and were told there was something to it..... there was some smoke there.  Recall too that the whole Russia story broke before Trump was inaugurated.  Why wouldn't Dem politicians push to impeach him at that time if they believed the assertions?  If there was a deep state conspiracy to manufacture evidence, and those allegations are proved in a trial, I would sure be angry with those folks.

 

Many people now hate Trump.  I didn't mean to imply they don't hate him.  I meant to point out that the continued suspicion of the guy and continued investigations are not simply based on hate.  There have been and continue to be valid reasons to investigate his actions.

[Golden Goat]

Romney will vote to convict on both charges. Not surprised; His jealousy has been painfully obvious for years.
 

Edited February 5, 2020 by Golden Goat

[keepthefaith]

2 minutes ago, Golden Goat said:

Romney will vote to convict on both charges. Not surprised; His jealousy has been painfully obvious for years.
 

 

And to think I thought he'd be a great Pres back in 2012.  I don't see how anyone can vote to convict on the obstruction article and on the abuse of power, there are a few reasons to toss that one and very little on which to convict.

[Foxx]

50 minutes ago, Bob in Mich said:

 

Sort of agreeing with my initial point that the worst any coup claimant should make, was that many were duped.  Tough to understand how I am ignoring possible Oministration misconduct, when I keep repeating they should look into the alleged FISA abuse and to punish any wrongdoing.

 

That obstruction point of yours has a sort of logical hole too.  It seems people want to ignore the possibility that Trump may have assumed that Mueller was investigating things that he did not investigate, or that he would discover some wrongdoing that he did not.  He may have thought Mueller was going to discover some, say past tax fraud, when Mueller did not go there.  If he wanted to stop the investigation because he feared, say tax fraud charges, he may have wanted to obstruct the investigation even though in the end, Mueller did not investigate that issue.  That is an explanation of how obstruction could happen without Trump later being charged with conspiracy.

 

As far as those lying to me for three years.....First, let me repeat, I don't agree that news outlets were lying for three years.  The Dems in Congress, the reporters, the people, and Mueller should have been suspicious, and investigating Trumps actions were justified so, no, I am not outraged at them.  I guess as I just described, reporters work with traditional sources and were told there was something to it..... there was some smoke there.  Recall too that the whole Russia story broke before Trump was inaugurated.  Why wouldn't Dem politicians push to impeach him at that time if they believed the assertions?  If there was a deep state conspiracy to manufacture evidence, and those allegations are proved in a trial, I would sure be angry with those folks.

 

Many people now hate Trump.  I didn't mean to imply they don't hate him.  I meant to point out that the continued suspicion of the guy and continued investigations are not simply based on hate.  There have been and continue to be valid reasons to investigate his actions.

i disagree with the statement, "... the worst any coup claimant should make, was that many were duped ...". please explain your rational behind this statement. i would argue that they are complicit. unwittingly, but all the same, complicit. because you and your ilk have chosen to swallow the propaganda narrative, hook, line and sinker without asking simple questions that would have easily exposed the false narrative. you have put this nation in the position it finds itself today. i understand that that is a huge statement, but i stand by it. as citizens of this great nation, we have an obligation to keep it. the only way one is going to keep it, is by informing themselves. period.

 

your argument against obstruction of justice has a hole as large as a Mack truck in it. you can posit any argument you like on what may have been being looked into and that Trump been guilty of, the inevitable, inescapable conclusion here is.... he wasn't guilty of anything.

 

you still believe that the propaganda presstitutes have been telling you the truth for the last 3 + years? there is no response from me if you still believe this other than my main argument, you have swallowed the narrative, hook, line and sinker. i believe, from reading your posts, that you do not, nor will you seek out information sources outside of the main stream narrative. having this in mind, i understand why you think as you do. you'll have to understand my position with regard to your position. that being, you only have one source of information and refuse to look deeper so there is nothing i, nor anyone else  is going to say that will get you to change your MSM fed understanding. where you, i and a good many others here differ, is that those of us who believe that there was an attempted coup on a duly elected President of the United States, seek information from a great many sources. included in that information seek, we consider MSM narratives because there is always information wrapped in disinformation. having become adept at seeking out various news sources, we have learned to sift the wheat from the chaff. there are ways to read MSM articles and omit the narratives many of them attempt to paint.

 

just to delve a bit further into this... logic should dictate that not all news sources would come to the same conclusion if objectivity ruled the day. when you tune into many different MSM news sources  and they all, and i mean all parrot the same talking points, doesn't that strike you as someone having an agenda?

 

additionally, let's say for the sake of argument that Mueller was justified in his investigation (which he wasn't) the fact that it dragged on for the length of time it did was a sham. they knew there was no there there not long after the investigation was opened. a reasonable argument can be made that they dragged it out to benefit the Dems in the '18 election. 

 

the main reason many people hate Trump is because of the narrative from the Dems and the propaganda presstitutes. again, be honest with yourself here.... do you seriusly think that if Trump was a Democrat they wouldn't be singing his praises to the high heavens? one thing the Democrats can't escape is Trump's record of accomplishments. hate him all you like but if you take a look at what he has done, he has done more with less support than any lifelong politician. why do you think that is?

 

ETA: please read my post again. i did not say you, specifically were ignoring Ominstration possible misconduct. it was a generality. if the shoe fits, then wear it. if not, don't.

Edited February 5, 2020 by Foxx

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

5 minutes ago, Golden Goat said:

Romney will vote to convict on both charges. Not surprised; His jealousy has been painfully obvious for years.
 

 

...Smitten Mitt and Hillary need to go commiserate together.....two VERY sore losers...….

[Tiberius]

6 minutes ago, Golden Goat said:

Romney will vote to convict on both charges. Not surprised; His jealousy has been painfully obvious for years.
 

He can see the evidence. If you think Trump is innocent, you are simply being blindly partisan 

2 minutes ago, keepthefaith said:

 

And to think I thought he'd be a great Pres back in 2012.  I don't see how anyone can vote to convict on the obstruction article and on the abuse of power, there are a few reasons to toss that one and very little on which to convict.

Like Lamar Alexander said, the House managers proved their case