1. #11401
    Immortal Poopymonster's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Neverland Ranch Survivor
    Posts
    7,076
    Quote Originally Posted by Wyrt View Post
    Good thing McConnell already admitted to not being impartial on live TV.
    But he didn't do that while under oath. I can say I know @Breccia is banging Lindsey Graham's wife in the shower. Put me under oath though, and I'll admit I heard some people say it. Lots of people. Many people. You know, people.
    Quote Originally Posted by Crissi View Post
    Quit using other posters as levels of crazy. That is not ok


    If you look, you can see the straw man walking a red herring up a slippery slope coming to join this conversation.

  2. #11402
    The Undying Breccia's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    NY, USA
    Posts
    39,909
    Quote Originally Posted by Poopymonster View Post
    I can say I know @Breccia is banging Lindsey Graham's wife in the shower.
    Aww, yeah, you know that's right, baby.

    Since I freed up his time, Graham did make room to talk about summarily dismissing all charges without hearing evidence.

    That’s dead for practical purposes. There are a lot of senators who I think will wind up acquitting the president but believe we need to hear the House’s case [and] the president’s case in answer to the House’s case.
    Yeah...if Graham says that, others are ready to back that play. Looks like Trump gets his day in "court" just what he wanted.

    EDIT: Oh shit, forgot to mention, he said it on FOX News. No mistaking that message.

  3. #11403
    Quote Originally Posted by Netherspark View Post
    So at the beginning of the trial the senators swear an oath to be 'impartial jurors'. Are there any consequences if they are found to be acting blatantly against that oath?
    In a fair world? Politicians would be subjected to consequences almost as bad as say, murderers. But this is a world where they make the rules and to hell with the consequences for being dishonest. Probably one of my favorite renditions of justice being done to government was in a Dr. McNinja comic where a bad guy blew up most of the politicians in the U.S. and pretty much everyone clapped.

  4. #11404
    Quote Originally Posted by Poopymonster View Post
    But he didn't do that while under oath. I can say I know @Breccia is banging Lindsey Graham's wife in the shower. Put me under oath though, and I'll admit I heard some people say it. Lots of people. Many people. You know, people.
    Except he's a closeted gay man and not married.

  5. #11405
    Quote Originally Posted by Omega10 View Post
    A lot of people act on the premise that "Chaos is a ladder."

    Unfortunately, in the meantime, we all have to LIVE in this chaos.

    Oh, I would remove the word "potentially" from the bolded phrase.
    I used the word potentially in an attempt to convince myself things aren't actually as bad as they are. Sadly they are worse.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Zantos View Post
    Can't lie, seems like Trump may be the first president to be removed. His lawyers don't even seem to be denying anything at this point, Their just saying its not illegal to do. Honestly, how dumb do you have to be to not even deny any of the allegations? Of course trying to blackmail a foreign government into investigating a political rival by threatening any help for them is illegal. I really do hope it succeeds. He makes us all look like trash and is more and more pushing any world allies we have away.
    Trump has too many supporters in the Senate for his removal to ever be a risk. Which is a good reason to start voting all of these senators out of office starting with moscow mitch.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Netherspark View Post
    So at the beginning of the trial the senators swear an oath to be 'impartial jurors'. Are there any consequences if they are found to be acting blatantly against that oath?
    Sadly no. Truth and ethics have little to do with what is going on in the Senate.

  6. #11406
    Immortal Stormspark's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Columbus OH
    Posts
    7,953
    Quote Originally Posted by zorkuus View Post
    Nothing matters anymore.
    The US has no checks and balances at all. The much lauded "checks and balances" in the constitution are suggestions, only. We've seen that there are ZERO consequences for outright ignoring them in favor of dictatorship.

  7. #11407
    Quote Originally Posted by Stormspark View Post
    The US has no checks and balances at all. The much lauded "checks and balances" in the constitution are suggestions, only. We've seen that there are ZERO consequences for outright ignoring them in favor of dictatorship.
    Yeah that's kinda the problem. Congress and the Senate are supposed to keep the president in check and vice versa but if one house and the president are on the same side, why would they do that?

  8. #11408
    Quote Originally Posted by Waniou View Post
    Yeah that's kinda the problem. Congress and the Senate are supposed to keep the president in check and vice versa but if one house and the president are on the same side, why would they do that?
    Because the Founders, who are so wise and can never be questioned, never considered that people would be more loyal to their political party than the country at large.

  9. #11409
    Quote Originally Posted by eschatological View Post
    Because the Founders, who are so wise and can never be questioned, never considered that people would be more loyal to their political party than the country at large.
    I don't think they considered parties at all, to be honest. It was what, 2 or 3 elections until their noble idea of impartial electors choosing the government got subverted by political parties ?

  10. #11410
    Quote Originally Posted by Trifle View Post
    I don't think they considered parties at all, to be honest. It was what, 2 or 3 elections until their noble idea of impartial electors choosing the government got subverted by political parties ?
    Mmm, I mean, there were political parties from the outset. And the Federalist/anti-Federalist division was pretty strong from the get-go, so they still had some examples of partisanship. They certainly didn't see it to this degree.

  11. #11411
    Quote Originally Posted by Trifle View Post
    I don't think they considered parties at all, to be honest. It was what, 2 or 3 elections until their noble idea of impartial electors choosing the government got subverted by political parties ?
    And in the first two, they just voted unanimously for George Washington.

  12. #11412
    This is all a moot point. No one thought they would likely vote to convict. He should be convicted but that isn't my point. My point is that Senators are going to have to take a stand. If they vote to dismiss. Like it or not they will have to justify that vote to there constituents. That is the whole point here. Ultimately Senators like Collins, Gardner, Mcsally etc are going to have to justify why they voted to dismiss on something that is beyond what Nixon did.

  13. #11413
    Quote Originally Posted by Wermys View Post
    This is all a moot point. No one thought they would likely vote to convict. He should be convicted but that isn't my point. My point is that Senators are going to have to take a stand. If they vote to dismiss. Like it or not they will have to justify that vote to there constituents. That is the whole point here. Ultimately Senators like Collins, Gardner, Mcsally etc are going to have to justify why they voted to dismiss on something that is beyond what Nixon did.
    Beyond what Nixon did? hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha Thanks for the laugh. This thread makes me kinda smirk and almost laugh because it's just bitching ignoring the fact that he will not be removed. It's page after page of liberal democratic party wet dreams and whining about shit that doesn't matter. But this made me actually laugh. I want you guys to seriously come up with a list of 67 senators who would vote for removal. Until you can actually come up with 67 senators, this thread is just a giant bloviating whining circle jerk of nothing.

    On an even more laughable note, Schumer has decided he is going to make them vote on him getting witnesses because after a partisan house impeachment, he thinks 4 Republicans will break in the senate and help him get his wish.
    "And it will be up to four Republicans to side with the Constitution, to side with our Democracy, to side with rule of law," Schumer told reporters. "And not side, in blind obeisance, to President Trump and his desire to suppress the truth. Because in my judgment, he probably thinks he's guilty."
    Such a rousing argument, I bet all 100 senators will vote for his witnesses now.

    My favorite quote of the weekend:
    “Nancy Pelosi is going out on TV crowing that the president has been impeached forever.” “Well, when we get to final judgment, the president will have been acquitted forever of these bogus impeachment charges. That’s a much better outcome for the president and for the country.”
    [Infraction]
    Last edited by Rozz; 2020-01-20 at 03:08 PM. Reason: Minor Trolling

  14. #11414
    Void Lord Elegiac's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Aelia Capitolina
    Posts
    59,338
    Quote Originally Posted by TexasRules View Post
    Beyond what Nixon did? hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha Thanks for the laugh. This thread makes me kinda smirk and almost laugh because it's just bitching ignoring the fact that he will not be removed. It's page after page of liberal democratic party wet dreams and whining about shit that doesn't matter. But this made me actually laugh. I want you guys to seriously come up with a list of 67 senators who would vote for removal. Until you can actually come up with 67 senators, this thread is just a giant bloviating whining circle jerk of nothing.

    On an even more laughable note, Schumer has decided he is going to make them vote on him getting witnesses because after a partisan house impeachment, he thinks 4 Republicans will break in the senate and help him get his wish.

    Such a rousing argument, I bet all 100 senators will vote for his witnesses now.

    My favorite quote of the weekend:
    Note how this post actually doesn't dispute that what Trump did what he's accused of or that it's bad, merely that there aren't enough Republicans who would vote for removal.

    I'm surprised you'd be crowing for the acquittal of someone who called the US military 'losers'.
    Quote Originally Posted by Marjane Satrapi
    The world is not divided between East and West. You are American, I am Iranian, we don't know each other, but we talk and understand each other perfectly. The difference between you and your government is much bigger than the difference between you and me. And the difference between me and my government is much bigger than the difference between me and you. And our governments are very much the same.

  15. #11415
    Quote Originally Posted by Elegiac View Post
    Note how this post actually doesn't dispute that what Trump did what he's accused of or that it's bad, merely that there aren't enough Republicans who would vote for removal.

    I'm surprised you'd be crowing for the acquittal of someone who called the US military 'losers'.
    We all know his goal: trigger the libs, derail the thread, banned, repeat.

    The language he’s using is specifically to piss people off into responding to derail, best to ignore it and have a civil discussion with non-swampdwellers.

  16. #11416
    Quote Originally Posted by TexasRules View Post
    On an even more laughable note, Schumer has decided he is going to make them vote on him getting witnesses because after a partisan house impeachment, he thinks 4 Republicans will break in the senate and help him get his wish.
    Remember, only one party voted along party lines in Congress. The impeachment being partisan is not the fault of the democrats.

  17. #11417
    Quote Originally Posted by TexasRules View Post
    Beyond what Nixon did? hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha Thanks for the laugh. This thread makes me kinda smirk and almost laugh because it's just bitching ignoring the fact that he will not be removed. It's page after page of liberal democratic party wet dreams and whining about shit that doesn't matter. But this made me actually laugh. I want you guys to seriously come up with a list of 67 senators who would vote for removal. Until you can actually come up with 67 senators, this thread is just a giant bloviating whining circle jerk of nothing.

    On an even more laughable note, Schumer has decided he is going to make them vote on him getting witnesses because after a partisan house impeachment, he thinks 4 Republicans will break in the senate and help him get his wish.

    Such a rousing argument, I bet all 100 senators will vote for his witnesses now.

    My favorite quote of the weekend:
    Sorry if you are having trouble comprehending my point. I know its difficult to fathom when someone types in that they know an conviction isn't possible with the likes of enablers like yourself who refuse to understand how bribery works. But aside from that. I had no expectation of him ever being found guilty with the quality of senators on the republican side that we currently have. I know its difficult to say a+b=c or 1+1=2 to some people so let me elucidate my point.

    I could rehash the arguments but your whole argument is just to start again into doing the standard fud and whataboutism and I am not going to bother. Because that was never my point. I dare you to find anywhere in my statement where this was my main point. Oh I believe he is guilty. But most of us aren't under the delusion that Republicans will do the right thing. But my point instead is to let the electorate ultimately make the decision in November after being presented the information and watching Republican Senators and Congressman having to actually justify there vote in front of the electorate. Which is fine with me. And should be by you as well giving your obvious belief in his innocence. I have a high expectation from people based on last years midterms to how that will likely turn out. Ultimately your whole point is about something I never said. Which I am sorry if you had difficulty understanding. But you as a Trump supporter it doesn't surprise me. I think you will agree with me however that no matter what happens people like yourself will have to find some way to convince voters in the state like Colorado, Arizona, Maine, Michigan etc that Trump is innocent. Shouldn't be too hard to do after what happened with the last election.

  18. #11418
    Quote Originally Posted by TexasRules View Post
    whining about shit that doesn't matter.
    When the president breaks the law it doesn't matter? Well now, looks like someone changed reality last I checked.

    Dontrike/Shadow Priest/Black Cell Faction Friend Code - 5172-0967-3866

  19. #11419
    Quote Originally Posted by Dontrike View Post
    When the president breaks the law it doesn't matter? Well now, looks like someone changed reality last I checked.
    They whined all of Obama's presidency that he broke the law, but couldn't cite anything that was tied to Obama. But when Trump actually breaks something that is explicitly stated in the constitution, we should ignore it, and in some cases like Kokolums wants, we should give Trump and the Republicans everything because they are hold this country hostage and they want us to "negotiate" with the terrorists.

  20. #11420
    Quote Originally Posted by TexasRules View Post
    Beyond what Nixon did? hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha Thanks for the laugh. This thread makes me kinda smirk and almost laugh because it's just bitching ignoring the fact that he will not be removed. It's page after page of liberal democratic party wet dreams and whining about shit that doesn't matter. But this made me actually laugh. I want you guys to seriously come up with a list of 67 senators who would vote for removal. Until you can actually come up with 67 senators, this thread is just a giant bloviating whining circle jerk of nothing.

    On an even more laughable note, Schumer has decided he is going to make them vote on him getting witnesses because after a partisan house impeachment, he thinks 4 Republicans will break in the senate and help him get his wish.

    Such a rousing argument, I bet all 100 senators will vote for his witnesses now.

    My favorite quote of the weekend:
    Notice fine internet people how he isn't defending what trump did. Lately the argument seems to be "well he's not getting removed so nyeh!"

    So let me ask you this, and this is open to any trump supporter, are you ok with Trump asking a foreign nation outside of the appropriate channels to announce an investigation into a potential rival in the upcoming elections. Remember he asked in live TV for China to do it as well

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •