Scraps Posted February 10, 2021 Share Posted February 10, 2021 2 minutes ago, wnyguy said: That's because there was no insurrection. None. Well, a traitor like you can't recognize an insurrection. So I'm not surprised. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wnyguy Posted February 10, 2021 Share Posted February 10, 2021 Just now, Scraps said: Well, a traitor like you can't recognize an insurrection. So I'm not surprised. I served my Country in the United States Army. I am no traitor and what happened was no insurrection. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldmanfan Posted February 10, 2021 Share Posted February 10, 2021 1 minute ago, wnyguy said: I served my Country in the United States Army. I am no traitor and what happened was no insurrection. Thanks for your service. Sincerely. I applaud all who wore the uniform. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scraps Posted February 10, 2021 Share Posted February 10, 2021 1 minute ago, wnyguy said: I served my Country in the United States Army. I am no traitor and what happened was no insurrection. There was a bunch of former military engaged in the insurrection on Jan 6 2021, just like back in 1861. They, and you, are still traitors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wnyguy Posted February 10, 2021 Share Posted February 10, 2021 7 minutes ago, Scraps said: There was a bunch of former military engaged in the insurrection on Jan 6 2021, just like back in 1861. They, and you, are still traitors. Your opinion matters naught to me. Good day, sir. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scraps Posted February 10, 2021 Share Posted February 10, 2021 Just now, wnyguy said: Your opinion matters naught to me. Good day, sir. Likewise the opinion of someone who would violate his oath to "defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic", but can't recognize a domestic enemy matters naught to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wnyguy Posted February 10, 2021 Share Posted February 10, 2021 1 minute ago, Scraps said: Likewise the opinion of someone who would violate his oath to "defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic", but can't recognize a domestic enemy matters naught to me. I said Good day, sir. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scraps Posted February 10, 2021 Share Posted February 10, 2021 1 minute ago, wnyguy said: I said Good day, sir. You prefaced that with a statement that deserved a response. Free speech. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wnyguy Posted February 10, 2021 Share Posted February 10, 2021 Just now, Scraps said: You prefaced that with a statement that deserved a response. Free speech. Then I will respond to your response. Make no mistake, I and many others, millions even, recognize a domestic enemy. An enemy hell bent on destroying the fabric and well being of this Country. Yes, we recognize them very clearly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scraps Posted February 10, 2021 Share Posted February 10, 2021 (edited) 5 minutes ago, wnyguy said: Then I will respond to your response. Make no mistake, I and many others, millions even, recognize a domestic enemy. An enemy hell bent on destroying the fabric and well being of this Country. Yes, we recognize them very clearly. And the people who stormed the Capitol, intent of disrupting the democratic process as defined in the Constitution and intent on hanging Mike Pence weren't "bent on destroying the fabric and well being of this Country"? Edited February 10, 2021 by Scraps Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wnyguy Posted February 10, 2021 Share Posted February 10, 2021 1 minute ago, Scraps said: And the people who stormed the Capitol, intent of disrupting the democratic process as defined in the Constitution and intent on hanging Mike Pence weren't "bent on destroying the fabric and well being of this Country"? Not at all, they were simply pointing out where the real enemy was hanging out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scraps Posted February 10, 2021 Share Posted February 10, 2021 1 minute ago, wnyguy said: Not at all, they were simply pointing out where the real enemy was hanging out. Thank you for admitting that you are a traitor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Backintheday544 Posted February 10, 2021 Share Posted February 10, 2021 (edited) 49 minutes ago, All_Pro_Bills said: If Trump isn't President the Senate has no authority to hold a trial. If he is they can try him. But he's not the President. And the impeachment articles were presented to the Senate after the buzzer sounded and Trump's term ended. Its not mix and match circumstances to get it to work the way you want. The issue is the grey area around interpretation of the meaning of "the President". But as I said in my original comment. It doesn't matter as 45 Senators voted that the trial is unconstitutional. Does anyone think a single one of them will vote to convict based on their belief the trial is illegal? 55-45 next week and game over. That’s an overly simplistic view of yesterday. My main take always from yesterday evidence on why I would disagree: 1. The Dems did a good job of presenting legal articles from conservative scholars who believe you can impeach after leaving office. These were the same scholars, like Adler, that were used by Republicans in the first impeachment to prove their points. 2. The vote that it was constitutional was done on a bi-partisan basis. The vote the it was unconstitutional was entirely partisan. Having 1 Republican sit there, listen to the arguments and change his mind is pretty telling. 3. I thought the Dems did a good job of explaining that impeachment post office was done in the past. 4. Not being able to impeach a losing president for actions committed at the end of a term could provide too much expanded reach for the Executive branch. As to the conviction vote, I think it’s a different animal. I have money on no conviction but it is a political process. If the evidence presented would affect chances of re-election you could see Republicans jump. If McConnell signals he would vote to convict, you’d see other Republican senators follow. The evidence does matter because unlike the first impeachment, America is watching this one. It has a catchy story. The people who voted one way or another will need to defend that vote as primary season is starting soon and then the next election cycle as well. Keep in mind in 2022, there are 14 Dem and 20 Rep senate seats up for grabs. Edited February 10, 2021 by Backintheday544 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
716er Posted February 10, 2021 Share Posted February 10, 2021 Yesterday one of Trump's lawyers suggested criminal accountability is most appropriate now that Trump is out of office. Today Georgia prosecutors opened up a criminal investigation into Trump's failed attempts to overturn Georgia's election. This impeachment was worth it for that bit alone. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted February 10, 2021 Share Posted February 10, 2021 11:22 a.m. Link copied Georgia prosecutors open criminal probe into Trump efforts to overturn state election result By Amy Gardner President Donald Trump departs after speaking in support of Republican Senate candidates at a rally in Dalton, Ga., on Jan. 4. (Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post) An Atlanta-area prosecutor has opened a criminal investigation into efforts to overturn the 2020 election result in Georgia in the wake of two calls that Trump placed to state officials, urging them to invalidate Biden’s victory in the state. In a letter Wednesday to Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, Fulton County District Attorney Fani T. Willis did not mention Trump by name but stated that her office is examining a raft of potential criminal charges related to “attempts to influence” the administration of the 2020 election in the state. In early January, Trump pressured Raffensperger during an hour-long phone call to “find” enough votes to reverse Biden’s victory in the state. Read the full story https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/02/10/trump-impeachment-live-updates/#link-KKL25CA4GZET3NWMXAR6DE4KNA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daz28 Posted February 10, 2021 Share Posted February 10, 2021 3 hours ago, snafu said: The Senate didn’t receive the Article of Impeachment until January 25. Here’s a NYT article from 1/19 that says Pelosi was holding the Article to build a case. The issue yesterday was whether the Senate should hold a trial after the President left office. It isn’t that stupid. The Senate couldn’t hear anything or do anything until the Article was put into their hands. There’s arguments to be made both ways. Seems that Justice Roberts might agree, or he at least thinks it is a bit closer case than you make it out to be. In any event, the vote is over and the trial is proceeding. I think this has already been made clear, but McConnell said he would not take up the impeachment. That's why it wasn't sent over. They voted on it on the 13th. For him to say it was too late after he said he wasn't going to take it up is ridiculous. Also, we are ridiculously going to see Republicans who already blamed Trump(including McConnell) vote against what they already publicly said. 40 minutes ago, 716er said: Yesterday one of Trump's lawyers suggested criminal accountability is most appropriate now that Trump is out of office. Today Georgia prosecutors opened up a criminal investigation into Trump's failed attempts to overturn Georgia's election. This impeachment was worth it for that bit alone. He also said he lost the election. He was awful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Backintheday544 Posted February 10, 2021 Share Posted February 10, 2021 It’s crazy how much of Trumps own words and the words of his supporters they can use. Don’t know about bombshell but I didn’t realize they arrested a bunch of people the night before on hun charges. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snafu Posted February 10, 2021 Share Posted February 10, 2021 13 minutes ago, daz28 said: I think this has already been made clear, but McConnell said he would not take up the impeachment. That's why it wasn't sent over. They voted on it on the 13th. For him to say it was too late after he said he wasn't going to take it up is ridiculous. Also, we are ridiculously going to see Republicans who already blamed Trump(including McConnell) vote against what they already publicly said. He also said he lost the election. He was awful. It isn't nearly as simple as you're making it out to be. There was a Senate memo describing the calendar restrictions and procedural issues And Schumer agreed on January 22 to a February proceeding, knowing that the House hadn't even delivered the Article to the Senate yet. There was no complaining at the time about the schedule. And even if there was, there wasn't much that could have or would have been done about it. This isn't simply a matter of McConnell being disingenuous. https://www.politico.com/news/2021/01/22/schumer-says-senate-will-receive-impeachment-article-on-monday-461305 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Backintheday544 Posted February 10, 2021 Share Posted February 10, 2021 Neguse is pretty awesome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melon Posted February 10, 2021 Share Posted February 10, 2021 2 hours ago, wnyguy said: Not at all, they were simply pointing out where the real enemy was hanging out. Donald loves you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts