oldmanfan Posted February 10, 2021 Share Posted February 10, 2021 8 minutes ago, snafu said: 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 Right. They negotiated this between the House and Senate. For Senators to now say it’s unconstitutional is disingenuous at best. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daz28 Posted February 10, 2021 Share Posted February 10, 2021 22 minutes ago, snafu said: 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 This was from January 13th: WASHINGTON (AP) — Majority Leader Mitch McConnell on Wednesday rejected a Democratic attempt to swiftly call the Senate into emergency session to hold an impeachment trial of President Donald Trump, all but assuring that those proceedings won’t occur until after Trump leaves office. If you remember Pelosi was terrified of what he might do 14 minutes ago, oldmanfan said: Right. They negotiated this between the House and Senate. For Senators to now say it’s unconstitutional is disingenuous at best. It's an outright lie. McConnell would not recall the Senate. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snafu Posted February 10, 2021 Share Posted February 10, 2021 18 minutes ago, daz28 said: This was from January 13th: WASHINGTON (AP) — Majority Leader Mitch McConnell on Wednesday rejected a Democratic attempt to swiftly call the Senate into emergency session to hold an impeachment trial of President Donald Trump, all but assuring that those proceedings won’t occur until after Trump leaves office. If you remember Pelosi was terrified of what he might do It's an outright lie. McConnell would not recall the Senate. Read that memo in the tweet I linked. It says that on January 7, the Senate voted unanimously to set their calendar, and they would have had to vote unanimously to change the calendar. It seems that whatever McConnell said on the 13th had that in mind. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted February 10, 2021 Author Share Posted February 10, 2021 140,000 Republicans left the QOP since the insurrection in 25 states that had readily available data. For example: 33,000 in CA 12,000 in PA 10,000 in AZ ‘‘There’s Nothing Left’: Why Thousands of Republicans Are Leaving the Party Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SectionC3 Posted February 10, 2021 Share Posted February 10, 2021 I'm listening to today's proceedings, and this thing is a slaughter. A straight slaughter. I'll be surprised if there's a conviction, but the managers are creaming the Trump and his senatorial followers in the court of public opinion. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Over 29 years of fanhood Posted February 10, 2021 Share Posted February 10, 2021 15 minutes ago, BillStime said: 140,000 Republicans left the QOP since the insurrection in 25 states that had readily available data. For example: 33,000 in CA 12,000 in PA 10,000 in AZ ‘‘There’s Nothing Left’: Why Thousands of Republicans Are Leaving the Party people leaving political parties and exercising independent thought is a beautiful thing. Too bad it took what it took. hopefully this movement gains momentum everywhere. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted February 10, 2021 Share Posted February 10, 2021 2 minutes ago, Over 29 years of fanhood said: people leaving political parties and exercising independent thought is a beautiful thing. Too bad it took what it took. hopefully this movement gains momentum everywhere. And go where? What type of political party would be best? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daz28 Posted February 10, 2021 Share Posted February 10, 2021 7 minutes ago, SectionC3 said: I'm listening to today's proceedings, and this thing is a slaughter. A straight slaughter. I'll be surprised if there's a conviction, but the managers are creaming the Trump and his senatorial followers in the court of public opinion. It's REAL bad. If this was a roast it would be hilarious, but sadly it's real life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Backintheday544 Posted February 10, 2021 Share Posted February 10, 2021 7 minutes ago, SectionC3 said: I'm listening to today's proceedings, and this thing is a slaughter. A straight slaughter. I'll be surprised if there's a conviction, but the managers are creaming the Trump and his senatorial followers in the court of public opinion. I think one of the most subtle arguments they made was about the GA Secretary of State. While they were laying out the facts that led to the GA SOSs family getting death threats, they were basically saying you and your family can be next on Trumps list. To lay out the tweets attacking the SOS, then the death threats made public, then Trump calling him an enemy of the state while knowing his family is getting death threats has to ring to any senator there that has a family. The other GA guy, forgot his position, telling Trump stop this or someone is going to get hurt was a great argument too. Its not like Trump wasn’t warned his conduct could lead to what it led to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daz28 Posted February 10, 2021 Share Posted February 10, 2021 59 minutes ago, snafu said: Read that memo in the tweet I linked. It says that on January 7, the Senate voted unanimously to set their calendar, and they would have had to vote unanimously to change the calendar. It seems that whatever McConnell said on the 13th had that in mind. WASHINGTON (AP) — Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell pointedly did not rule out Wednesday that he might eventually vote to convict the now twice-impeached President Donald Trump, but he also blocked a quick Senate impeachment trial. McConnell also issued a statement saying Congress and the government should spend the next week “completely focused on facilitating a safe inauguration and an orderly transfer of power” to Biden. He suggested Trump’s Senate trial would begin no earlier than Jan. 19 — in effect rejecting a drive by the chamber’s Democrats to begin the proceedings immediately so Trump could be ousted from office. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted February 10, 2021 Share Posted February 10, 2021 17 minutes ago, Over 29 years of fanhood said: people leaving political parties and exercising independent thought is a beautiful thing. Too bad it took what it took. hopefully this movement gains momentum everywhere. Oh don't make faces, do tell us what type of political party you'd like? A Trump Party? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snafu Posted February 10, 2021 Share Posted February 10, 2021 4 minutes ago, daz28 said: WASHINGTON (AP) — Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell pointedly did not rule out Wednesday that he might eventually vote to convict the now twice-impeached President Donald Trump, but he also blocked a quick Senate impeachment trial. McConnell also issued a statement saying Congress and the government should spend the next week “completely focused on facilitating a safe inauguration and an orderly transfer of power” to Biden. He suggested Trump’s Senate trial would begin no earlier than Jan. 19 — in effect rejecting a drive by the chamber’s Democrats to begin the proceedings immediately so Trump could be ousted from office. You and I are picking nits here, but (1) where did that quote come from? (2) what that report doesn't say is that the Senate trial COULD NOT begin before January 19 unless the Senate unanimously voted to change their own recess schedule that they had previously unanimously voted to set. Why does the article say that McConnell blocked anything if the entire Senate would have had to unanimously approve the proposal? (3) you don't ever say why the House didn't deliver the Article until January 25th -- the timing of that step completely wipes out anything else you say. The Senate didn't have any jurisdiction over the proceeding until that time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Over 29 years of fanhood Posted February 10, 2021 Share Posted February 10, 2021 3 minutes ago, Tiberius said: Oh don't make faces, do tell us what type of political party you'd like? A Trump Party? Are you literate? 21 minutes ago, Over 29 years of fanhood said: people leaving political parties and exercising independent thought is a beautiful thing. Too bad it took what it took. hopefully this movement gains momentum everywhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daz28 Posted February 10, 2021 Share Posted February 10, 2021 2 minutes ago, snafu said: You and I are picking nits here, but (1) where did that quote come from? (2) what that report doesn't say is that the Senate trial COULD NOT begin before January 19 unless the Senate unanimously voted to change their own recess schedule that they had previously unanimously voted to set. Why does the article say that McConnell blocked anything if the entire Senate would have had to unanimously approve the proposal? (3) you don't ever say why the House didn't deliver the Article until January 25th -- the timing of that step completely wipes out anything else you say. The Senate didn't have any jurisdiction over the proceeding until that time. Bro they WANTED to send them. Mitch CONTROLS if, and WHEN they vote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snafu Posted February 10, 2021 Share Posted February 10, 2021 Just now, daz28 said: Bro they WANTED to send them. Mitch CONTROLS if, and WHEN they vote Mitch doesn't control Pelosi. Different chambers. If she wanted to send the Article of Impeachment, Mitch couldn't stop her. And I've already shown you that Mitch and Chuck negotiated the start date of the trial before the Article was delivered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SectionC3 Posted February 10, 2021 Share Posted February 10, 2021 23 minutes ago, Tiberius said: And go where? What type of political party would be best? You hit it on the head. In a perverse way, leaving the political parties actually strengthens the two-party system. Those people who want to be "independent" (or blank, in political parlance) are just going to get more of the same. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Over 29 years of fanhood Posted February 10, 2021 Share Posted February 10, 2021 (edited) 1 hour ago, oldmanfan said: Right. They negotiated this between the House and Senate. For Senators to now say it’s unconstitutional is disingenuous at best. the unconstitutional argument in my lateness understanding was that impeachment was for removing from office and since that already happened it was unconstitutional. sounds like the counter that swayed the majority is that the precedent of aborting due to electing the incumbent out creates a moral hazard to do bad thing without consequence at the end of the term. makes sense... I just hope it doesn’t turn into a slew golf retroactive impeachments by the majority for the rest of time. 2 minutes ago, snafu said: Mitch doesn't control Pelosi. Different chambers. If she wanted to send the Article of Impeachment, Mitch couldn't stop her. And I've already shown you that Mitch and Chuck negotiated the start date of the trial before the Article was delivered. Lol!! No one controls Pelosi... no one. Well except her donors and contributors that is... Edited February 10, 2021 by Over 29 years of fanhood Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SectionC3 Posted February 10, 2021 Share Posted February 10, 2021 21 minutes ago, Backintheday544 said: I think one of the most subtle arguments they made was about the GA Secretary of State. While they were laying out the facts that led to the GA SOSs family getting death threats, they were basically saying you and your family can be next on Trumps list. To lay out the tweets attacking the SOS, then the death threats made public, then Trump calling him an enemy of the state while knowing his family is getting death threats has to ring to any senator there that has a family. The other GA guy, forgot his position, telling Trump stop this or someone is going to get hurt was a great argument too. Its not like Trump wasn’t warned his conduct could lead to what it led to. I'm pretty impressed with this presentation. The first impeachment trial . . . not as much. That was a different animal, though. This one is dynamite. I assume they're going to wrap it up with the point that intent is typically a circumstantial thing in the criminal realm--rarely does a criminal announce his or her intent, and it has to be inferred from the actions of the accused. They are just hammering that point today. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted February 10, 2021 Share Posted February 10, 2021 9 minutes ago, Over 29 years of fanhood said: Are you literate? Very! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daz28 Posted February 10, 2021 Share Posted February 10, 2021 1 minute ago, Over 29 years of fanhood said: the unconstitutional argument in my lateness understanding was that impeachment was for removing from office and since that already happened it was unconstitutional. sounds like the counter that swayed the majority is that the precedent of aborting due to electing the incumbent out creates a moral hazard to do bad thing without consequence at the end of the term. makes sense... I just hope it doesn’t turn into a slew golf retroactive impeachments by the majority for the rest of time. Lol!! No one controls Pelosi... no one. Exactly. It prevents them from committing high crimes, and then resigning. Trumps team attempted to counter that, but everyone knows there's zero appetite to convict a former president of criminal charges 2 minutes ago, SectionC3 said: I'm pretty impressed with this presentation. The first impeachment trial . . . not as much. That was a different animal, though. This one is dynamite. I assume they're going to wrap it up with the point that intent is typically a circumstantial thing in the criminal realm--rarely does a criminal announce his or her intent, and it has to be inferred from the actions of the accused. They are just hammering that point today. It will still be a nothing burger to Hannity, Tucker, and Laura Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts