Mega-Thread: Impeachment Proceedings & Inquiry of Trump

[Cerilis]

Wth made the thread just lose 4 (now bugged) pages? oO

[Puupi]

Wth made the thread just lose 4 (now bugged) pages? oO

Someone probably fixed the ghost pages of deleted posts.

[Slirith]

You doing your fucking job is as well. Thwart and his minions created this, clean it up or fuck off.

Cheers for the truth!

[Dontrike]

You see a lot of this, where people didn't really get fired up about the detainment conditions of children in immigration detention centers under Obama (so-called "kids in cages"), but then once Trump took over it was hair-on-fire time.

This is when you are trying to be disengenuous. Obama wasn't trying to keep the children here for as long as possible, like Trump, wasn't using them to scare other immigrants away, like Trump, wasn't separating families on purpose, like Trump, and other shit like that.

Obama started something not great, but ever so slightly needed for the right circumstances, but it was Trump that fucking took it and ran away with it in the worst way possible.

[Machismo]

I can only facepalm at how easy it is for a single account to get a dozen others to help him drive any thread off the rails for several pages on end.

Seriously, dudes.

Considering that exact poster was reported (with ample evidence) two weeks ago, I'd say the issue was not really with fellow posters. When faced with a poster with "underhanded intentions," other posters are left with two real options. First, they can try to ignore the problem, and hope that the powers that be take care of it, or that the "underhanded" one goes away. Second, they can continue to engage, so that more evidence is gained, and it makes it far more difficult for the powers that be to ignore said problem.

Now, the first option sounds nice, and some do try it. However, this is a discussion forum (argument forum), so engaging with those of differing beliefs, often aggressively, is a reason for being here. So, ignoring them, and allowing them to spread their bullshit is counter-intuitive. Choosing to engage with them allows people to scratch that argumentative itch, and can allow for more examples of that other poster being "underhanded." This also changes how the site and discussions appear. If the powers that be don't take care of something quickly (and that poster was reported by me, with evidence two weeks ago), then fellow posters have a nuclear option at their disposal. They can turn the forums into an utter shitshow, making it a quagmire of snarkiness, contempt, and vitriol. Make it worse, so that the powers that be feel compelled to actually act, or everything burns to the ground.

Now, I have been infracted a metric shit ton in these forums. Some I have definitely deserved, some I have not. Almost every single one was given for when I addressed one of these "underhanded" posters. I can be a very respectful guy, and I am capable of reasoned and informed discourse. I'm also quite capable of being an utter bastard, and doing little more than slinging manure. I will treat people according to how they are already behaving.

Yes, every other poster can choose to not engage these "underhanded" posters. They can seek to ignore them, move on, and expect that those posters will either go away, or will be banned. However, if the other posters are to do that, then there is an actual expectation for the "underhanded" posters to go away. Considering what we've seen on social media over the past decade, ignoring them doesn't really cause them to go away. It's always been about spreading misinformation. Ignoring one doesn't stop him from making a hundred more accounts, and doing the exact same thing. We know this, because we have posters who have literally made hundreds of accounts to do just that. The fellow posters are not able to deal with such things, that responsibility lies with those who run the site (not the mods).

So, if you expect us to simply ignore the problem, so you folks can take care of it (or that it will magically take care of itself), then can we expect the powers that be to take care of the problem in a more-timely manner?

[Shalcker]

I can only facepalm at how easy it is for a single account to get a dozen others to help him drive any thread off the rails for several pages on end.

What kind of "rails" do you imagine this thread should be on though?

People bring up different things then go on various tangents as arguments they find objectionable crop up, that's the usual way forum mega-threads work.

What is the point of supressing it and complaining when people discuss things they find worthwhile to discuss?

You are not required to "keep up" with any thread, and mega-threads always contain something you are not necessarily interested in.

[swiftowner]

What kind of "rails" do you imagine this thread should be on though?

People bring up different things then go on various tangents as arguments they find objectionable crop up, that's the usual way forum mega-threads work.

What is the point of supressing it and complaining when people discuss things they find worthwhile to discuss?

You are not required to "keep up" with any thread, and mega-threads always contain something you are not necessarily interested in.

This is better suited for a PM. This isn’t really relevant to the thread.

As far as what is relevant, everything Trump impeachment related.

Discussing what is reality, or what is truth or fact, is certainly NOT relevant. You are a long time poster here, you should know this, I’m sure you do, but we know who you are. I’m relatively new to the forums, I’ve had an account for years, but haven’t really been an active reader/participant until fairly recently, but even I know what is on-topic and what is not.

[Stormdash]

It's going to be spectacular good fun rubbing it in when a trial eventually takes place under the exact terms as in 1999 (no rational reason to change it) and Trump gets 55+ votes to acquit... probably only bothering to vote on Article I since Article II is mindless bibble on its own terms. I'm sure there will be some next level Louise Mensch bullshit to explain why it's all part of the master plan and now Trump's *really* in trouble.

[Belize]

It's going to be spectacular good fun rubbing it in when a trial eventually takes place under the exact terms as in 1999 (no rational reason to change it) and Trump gets 55+ votes to acquit... probably only bothering to vote on Article I since Article II is mindless bibble on its own terms. I'm sure there will be some next level Louise Mensch bullshit to explain why it's all part of the master plan and now Trump's *really* in trouble.

So let me get this straight:

Clinton being acquitted was partisan BS, but Trump being acquitted by a Senate who's member have been on live TV to say they have no intention of being impartial is totally fine.

Ya'll Trumpkins are hypocrites.

[omerome]

It's going to be spectacular good fun rubbing it in when a trial eventually takes place under the exact terms as in 1999 (no rational reason to change it) and Trump gets 55+ votes to acquit... probably only bothering to vote on Article I since Article II is mindless bibble on its own terms. I'm sure there will be some next level Louise Mensch bullshit to explain why it's all part of the master plan and now Trump's *really* in trouble.

Will the resident testify under oath?

[Bodakane]

It's going to be spectacular good fun rubbing it in when a trial eventually takes place under the exact terms as in 1999 (no rational reason to change it) and Trump gets 55+ votes to acquit... probably only bothering to vote on Article I since Article II is mindless bibble on its own terms. I'm sure there will be some next level Louise Mensch bullshit to explain why it's all part of the master plan and now Trump's *really* in trouble.

Why? We've all said Trump is not going to be removed.

What will be glorious, is that your traitorous Republican senators will, in spite of all the damning evidence, do right by themselves instead fo the country. THAT, is what impeachment is about. Making those non patriots sign their names to being in favor of corruption.

2018 will have nothing on 2020, in terms of blue wave.

[Stormdash]

So let me get this straight:

Clinton being acquitted was partisan BS, but Trump being acquitted by a Senate who's member have been on live TV to say they have no intention of being impartial is totally fine.

Ya'll Trumpkins are hypocrites.

In 1999, Tom Daschle publicly acknowledged that his office was coordinating with the White House's legal team. I'm not here to relitigate the Clinton impeachment other than to make it clear that... that's now the template for the modern Senate impeachment trial. No new witnesses, no new evidence, the majority coordinating with the President's legal team. Nothing said by any Senator on the subject of Trump's trial deviates in form or spirit from what people over the age of 35 will remember quite clearly if they were bothering to pay attention to the news back then.

- - - Updated - - -

Why? We've all said Trump is not going to be removed.

What will be glorious, is that your traitorous Republican senators will, in spite of all the damning evidence, do right by themselves instead fo the country. THAT, is what impeachment is about. Making those non patriots sign their names to being in favor of corruption.

2018 will have nothing on 2020, in terms of blue wave.

The damning evidence of I Disagree With Him, which is basically the thrust of this?

As for the election... yeah. Heh. 325+ EVs in reelection.

[Shalcker]

This is better suited for a PM. This isn’t really relevant to the thread.

As far as what is relevant, everything Trump impeachment related.

Discussing what is reality, or what is truth or fact, is certainly NOT relevant.

There are already restrictions on things "impeachment related" though (like Biden/Ukraine angles), so i would really like clarity on where moderators think this thread should be railroaded to.

That has been made clear already. Don't pursue this any further.

[Templar 331]

The damning evidence of I Disagree With Him, which is basically the thrust of this?

As for the election... yeah. Heh. 325+ EVs in reelection.

The evidence Trump himself provided of him extorting Ukraine to "investigate" his political opponent.

[Belize]

In 1999, Tom Daschle publicly acknowledged that his office was coordinating with the White House's legal team. I'm not here to relitigate the Clinton impeachment other than to make it clear that... that's now the template for the modern Senate impeachment trial. No new witnesses, no new evidence, the majority coordinating with the President's legal team. Nothing said by any Senator on the subject of Trump's trial deviates in form or spirit from what people over the age of 35 will remember quite clearly if they were bothering to pay attention to the news back then.

That's some babyback bullshit revisionist history right there.

Daschle never went on TV to say he had no intentions of being impartial. Fuck Daschle and Lott (GOP minority leader) did everything they could to make it as neutral (or neutral seeming) as possible to preserve the process.
The GOP at the time were 100% on board with the Dems that the Impeachment was BS. The first vote (no extra witnesses) passed the Senate unanimously.

If you're going to lecture someone about history, try to either be right, or don't bother gaslighting those that actually know what happened with false information.

https://www.npr.org/2019/12/19/78935...espectable-way

[Machismo]

It's going to be spectacular good fun rubbing it in when a trial eventually takes place under the exact terms as in 1999 (no rational reason to change it) and Trump gets 55+ votes to acquit... probably only bothering to vote on Article I since Article II is mindless bibble on its own terms. I'm sure there will be some next level Louise Mensch bullshit to explain why it's all part of the master plan and now Trump's *really* in trouble.

So, when Trump testifies?

Yes, I will enjoy that.

[Grapemask]

In 1999, Tom Daschle publicly acknowledged that his office was coordinating with the White House's legal team.

Belize posted an article that touches on this, but this is not what Daschle said. His statements were in no way similar to McConnell's. The democrat minority leadership stated that they were working logistically with Clinton, doing all that important stuff needed to figure out how to run an impeachment trial when the guy on trial runs the country. They worked hard to preserve the integrity of the process on their end, partly because they viewed the GOP as abusing it.

That is to say,

Nothing said by any Senator on the subject of Trump's trial deviates in form or spirit from what people over the age of 35 will remember quite clearly if they were bothering to pay attention to the news back then.

As one of those people, and someone who even swung for the Republican team at that time, I can debunk this as flatly false.

[cubby]

The declaration of war attack on Iran is going to backfire yugely on Trump and his co-conspirators. What they haven't realized is this move will give Pelosi precisely the reasons she needs to hold of delivery of the two Articles of Impeachment until after the Senate primaries.

[Bodakane]

In 1999, Tom Daschle publicly acknowledged that his office was coordinating with the White House's legal team. I'm not here to relitigate the Clinton impeachment other than to make it clear that... that's now the template for the modern Senate impeachment trial. No new witnesses, no new evidence, the majority coordinating with the President's legal team. Nothing said by any Senator on the subject of Trump's trial deviates in form or spirit from what people over the age of 35 will remember quite clearly if they were bothering to pay attention to the news back then.

- - - Updated - - -



The damning evidence of I Disagree With Him, which is basically the thrust of this?

As for the election... yeah. Heh. 325+ EVs in reelection.

Dafuq?

Mueller Report alone laid out 10 cases of obstruction of justice. It also clearly and concisely laid out conspiracy.
He's been lawfully and factually impeached and the reasons he's been impeached are proven by: confessions, eye witness testimony, the transcript and email correspondence. That is literally every piece of evidence needed.

You guys hand wave that stuff BECAUSE of your bias. This is literally your playbook.

You guys make accusations that are unfounded about your opponents from Obama to Hillary to Biden, act like its all true with zero evidence, then out of hand reject all evidence that your guys are guilty even though there is literally mountains of it. None of you have morals or ethics.

[Stormdash]

And yet, nothing from the Mueller report neither examination for impeachment (probably because the report itself found insufficient PC to indict and did not, contrary to outright fabrication, rely on the bipartisan historical DOJ guidance that a sitting President was immune to criminal prosecution).

And also funny that neither article actually cites to a statute to allege that Trump has violated, opting rather to just make up two sufficiently “illegalish” sounded phrases and impeached him for these.