Doc Posted June 15, 2023 Share Posted June 15, 2023 (edited) 2 minutes ago, Chris farley said: unlike the DEMS, maybe building a strong case first? Making sure they have one. No need. It's obvious you don't need a strong case to impeach. The idea is for maxiumum effect, i.e. doing it closer to the election. Edited June 15, 2023 by Doc 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Ferguson forever Posted June 15, 2023 Share Posted June 15, 2023 2 minutes ago, Chris farley said: unlike the DEMS, maybe building a strong case first? Making sure they have one. ah yes, like Benghazi... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
All_Pro_Bills Posted June 15, 2023 Share Posted June 15, 2023 9 minutes ago, Doc said: What's the rush? Better to do it later in the year/early next year. I'm guessing 1) he's so unpopular that he's forced to resign by DNC leadership, 2) he take a dirt nap before this term expires. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted June 15, 2023 Share Posted June 15, 2023 9 minutes ago, All_Pro_Bills said: I'm guessing 1) he's so unpopular that he's forced to resign by DNC leadership, 2) he take a dirt nap before this term expires. And have Kammy take over? I can't see it. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Frankish Reich Posted June 15, 2023 Share Posted June 15, 2023 Just to point out some particularly stupid takes people have reposted here. This one is so jarringly dumb that I can't imagine even a wingnut "news" source posting it. "The National Archives has no enforcement authority, so how did this wind up as a DOJ case?" Well, it wound up as a DOJ case BECAUSE THE NATIONAL ARCHIVES HAS NO INDEPENDENT PROSECUTION OR ENFORCEMENT AUTHORITY. That is precisely why the DOJ is called "the nation's law firm." Government agencies refer matters for civil/criminal enforcement to DOJ all the time. That's what DOJ does. Maybe think a little bit before posting those "ooh, look, they're really out on a limb here" comments? Another one, too pointless to bother linking to (again; you can see it in the postings here if you want to make yourself just a bit stupider): "My (presumably) old father has never been a registered member of a political party, but now the Democrats' behavior has finally made him register as a Republican." Look at this: https://news.gallup.com/poll/15370/party-affiliation.aspx And tell me whether there's any discernible trend toward one party or the other over the last couple years. It fluctuates within a few percentage points. The poster (and reposter) may find daddy's registration to be an incredibly pivotal and telling event. It isn't. So there you have it: Twitter makes you dumber. First through a gross misunderstanding (deliberate? ignorance?) of how federal law enforcement works. Second through meaningless anecdote. 1 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoCal Deek Posted June 15, 2023 Share Posted June 15, 2023 1 hour ago, Tiberius said: Nice meme Tibs. Soon you'll be right up there with BillSy....but so far you're not even close to being in his league. And no, it's not grasping at straws. I know you cannot fathom the idea of the defense actually putting on a defense, but unfortunately (for you) that's how our system of Justice works. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted June 15, 2023 Share Posted June 15, 2023 16 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said: Just to point out some particularly stupid takes people have reposted here. This one is so jarringly dumb that I can't imagine even a wingnut "news" source posting it. "The National Archives has no enforcement authority, so how did this wind up as a DOJ case?" Well, it wound up as a DOJ case BECAUSE THE NATIONAL ARCHIVES HAS NO INDEPENDENT PROSECUTION OR ENFORCEMENT AUTHORITY. That is precisely why the DOJ is called "the nation's law firm." Government agencies refer matters for civil/criminal enforcement to DOJ all the time. That's what DOJ does. Maybe think a little bit before posting those "ooh, look, they're really out on a limb here" comments? Another one, too pointless to bother linking to (again; you can see it in the postings here if you want to make yourself just a bit stupider): "My (presumably) old father has never been a registered member of a political party, but now the Democrats' behavior has finally made him register as a Republican." Look at this: https://news.gallup.com/poll/15370/party-affiliation.aspx And tell me whether there's any discernible trend toward one party or the other over the last couple years. It fluctuates within a few percentage points. The poster (and reposter) may find daddy's registration to be an incredibly pivotal and telling event. It isn't. So there you have it: Twitter makes you dumber. First through a gross misunderstanding (deliberate? ignorance?) of how federal law enforcement works. Second through meaningless anecdote. I think if you extend this perspective to traditional media sources, you're right on the money. The illusion of a free press is that it's actually corporate press, with corporate affiliations and everything that goes with it. Consider the agenda, consider the relative win ratio of the publication (Which outlets accurately reported on Russia collusion, considering language and tone of articles, the accuracy of what they were told by their sources deep within, and what they decide not to report). 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Frankish Reich Posted June 15, 2023 Share Posted June 15, 2023 11 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said: I think if you extend this perspective to traditional media sources, you're right on the money. The illusion of a free press is that it's actually corporate press, with corporate affiliations and everything that goes with it. Consider the agenda, consider the relative win ratio of the publication (Which outlets accurately reported on Russia collusion, considering language and tone of articles, the accuracy of what they were told by their sources deep within, and what they decide not to report). Well, no. Or not to the same extent. The mainstream media has its issues. And the second Twitter thing I picked on here—anecdote as somehow meaningful without further research—is one of them. But the first one — a preposterous take on how federal enforcement works — would thankfully never make it past an editor at the NYT, Wash Post, WSJ. See what I said there? An editor. That’s the difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
All_Pro_Bills Posted June 15, 2023 Share Posted June 15, 2023 1 hour ago, Doc said: And have Kammy take over? I can't see it. They'll force her out prior. She resigns before Joe perhaps to take over Feinstein's Senate seat in California. They appoint the chosen one as VP. Then Joe resigns citing some health issue. Then the appointed VP become President. Some liberal aristocrat like Newsom. A person receiving zero votes. That would be quite a coup. But following along with the Constitution, within the "rules". Ethical? Well, that's debatable and not critical to politics. Newsom becomes the de facto 2024 nominee without much of a fight and has 6 to 9 months of experience as President to run on. Is it likely, no. Is is a pretty wild scenario? Absolutely. Would I put it past this crew to try to pull off this type of scenario? Absolutely not. 1 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wnyguy Posted June 15, 2023 Share Posted June 15, 2023 6 minutes ago, All_Pro_Bills said: They'll force her out prior. She resigns before Joe perhaps to take over Feinstein's Senate seat in California. They appoint the chosen one as VP. Then Joe resigns citing some health issue. Then the appointed VP become President. Some liberal aristocrat like Newsom. A person receiving zero votes. That would be quite a coup. But following along with the Constitution, within the "rules". Ethical? Well, that's debatable and not critical to politics. Newsom becomes the de facto 2024 nominee without much of a fight and has 6 to 9 months of experience as President to run on. Is it likely, no. Is is a pretty wild scenario? Absolutely. Would I put it past this crew to try to pull off this type of scenario? Absolutely not. And that nominee will garner over 80 million votes in 2024 somehow. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted June 15, 2023 Share Posted June 15, 2023 39 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said: Well, no. Or not to the same extent. The mainstream media has its issues. And the second Twitter thing I picked on here—anecdote as somehow meaningful without further research—is one of them. But the first one — a preposterous take on how federal enforcement works — would thankfully never make it past an editor at the NYT, Wash Post, WSJ. See what I said there? An editor. That’s the difference. Oh, I see it. The MSM issue is loss of revenue and what appears to be a dying business model. The failure to recognize news and information is shaped by agenda, political or profit-driven, is what occurs at the consumer level, even with…wait for it…editors giving a thumbs up or thumbs down. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanNC Posted June 15, 2023 Share Posted June 15, 2023 @The Frankish Reich The DOJ as "the nations law firm" THAT NOBODY IN THEIR RIGHT MIND BELIEVES EVEN A LITTLE WHEN IT COMES TO TRUMP. This reputation is fully justified. But please continue with look at you wingnuts, why don't you trust proven liars like we do. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Ferguson forever Posted June 15, 2023 Share Posted June 15, 2023 (edited) just say what you mean Karl https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/4051687-karl-rove-in-journal-op-ed-trump-will-pay-a-high-price-in-mar-a-lago-case/ “Unlike Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s charges of falsifying business records, this indictment is devastating in its rigor of evidence and the seriousness of the alleged crimes,” Rove wrote. “Even so, the case will further tear our country apart, as it has a heavy impact on the presidential campaign and—wrongly—undermines confidence in our justice system.” “The blame for this calamity rests solely on Mr. Trump and his childish impulse to keep mementos from his time in the Oval Office, no matter what the law says,” he added. Edited June 16, 2023 by redtail hawk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanNC Posted June 16, 2023 Share Posted June 16, 2023 But, but the nations law firm!! 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kemp Posted June 16, 2023 Author Share Posted June 16, 2023 On 6/15/2023 at 8:12 AM, Doc said: We care about as much as you care that Joke stole classified documents as a Senator and kept them in his garage where any of his idiot son's cronies could have seen them. Again if your cult wants to go down that path, don't whine when Joke gets impeached. 1. When found, Biden's people returned them. If Trump had done so, he wouldn't be charged with the offense. More proof that he is a total moron. 2. They weren't nuclear secrets. 3. Once again, the best you can do is what about the other guy, because you can't do anything else. I've probably asked 50 times in this thread for someone to say Trump is innocent. None of you can say that because even you know Trump is guilty. 1 1 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kemp Posted June 16, 2023 Author Share Posted June 16, 2023 12 hours ago, BillsFanNC said: But, but the nations law firm!! For the 2020 United States presidential election, Rasmussen Reports' final White House Watch survey of likely U.S. voters showed Democrat Joe Biden with a 1% lead over Republican Donald Trump, stating that "President Trump and Democrat Joe Biden are in a near tie."[7] Ultimately, Biden won the election by 4.5 percentage points. In 2018, Rasmussen Reports predicted that Republicans would win the generic ballot by 1 percentage point while the actual election results had Democrats winning by nearly 9 percentage points. This error of nearly 10 percentage points was the largest polling error out of major firms who polled the national generic ballot. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted June 16, 2023 Share Posted June 16, 2023 7 minutes ago, Kemp said: 1. When found, Biden's people returned them. If Trump had done so, he wouldn't be charged with the offense. More proof that he is a total moron. 2. They weren't nuclear secrets. 3. Once again, the best you can do is what about the other guy, because you can't do anything else. I've probably asked 50 times in this thread for someone to say Trump is innocent. None of you can say that because even you know Trump is guilty. Biden didn’t turn the information in “when found”, he possessed the material for more than 20 years, and after a thorough and exhaustive search, the DOJ found additional documents not previously returned. You’re free to carry water and defend like a true believer, but you’re not free to make declarations that are obviously false. You cannot possibly know what material Biden had in his possession, which simply means you’re imaging a fact pattern to suit your bias. The other guy is Joe Biden, pretending not to know his name doesn’t provide cover for your silliness, and he’s relevant because he took and maintained classified material as a Senator, VP, a private citizen when he would have known he absolutely should not have. https://www.foxnews.com/media/biden-shamed-irresponsible-trump-classified-docs-before-wh-admitted-sensitive-vp-records 😂 These are facts, Kemp, and all your crusading to the contrary doesn’t change that. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoCal Deek Posted June 16, 2023 Share Posted June 16, 2023 26 minutes ago, Kemp said: 1. When found, Biden's people returned them. If Trump had done so, he wouldn't be charged with the offense. More proof that he is a total moron. 2. They weren't nuclear secrets. 3. Once again, the best you can do is what about the other guy, because you can't do anything else. I've probably asked 50 times in this thread for someone to say Trump is innocent. None of you can say that because even you know Trump is guilty. Trump is innocent. Are we good now? 😉 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wnyguy Posted June 16, 2023 Share Posted June 16, 2023 21 minutes ago, Kemp said: For the 2020 United States presidential election, Rasmussen Reports' final White House Watch survey of likely U.S. voters showed Democrat Joe Biden with a 1% lead over Republican Donald Trump, stating that "President Trump and Democrat Joe Biden are in a near tie."[7] Ultimately, Biden won the election by 4.5 percentage points. In 2018, Rasmussen Reports predicted that Republicans would win the generic ballot by 1 percentage point while the actual election results had Democrats winning by nearly 9 percentage points. This error of nearly 10 percentage points was the largest polling error out of major firms who polled the national generic ballot. I wonder how that happened? Polling error or election result shenanigans? You decide. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Ferguson forever Posted June 16, 2023 Share Posted June 16, 2023 5 hours ago, Kemp said: For the 2020 United States presidential election, Rasmussen Reports' final White House Watch survey of likely U.S. voters showed Democrat Joe Biden with a 1% lead over Republican Donald Trump, stating that "President Trump and Democrat Joe Biden are in a near tie."[7] Ultimately, Biden won the election by 4.5 percentage points. In 2018, Rasmussen Reports predicted that Republicans would win the generic ballot by 1 percentage point while the actual election results had Democrats winning by nearly 9 percentage points. This error of nearly 10 percentage points was the largest polling error out of major firms who polled the national generic ballot. Rasmussen is a political campaign arm of the R party 5 hours ago, wnyguy said: I wonder how that happened? Polling error or election result shenanigans? You decide. The courts already did Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts