1. #10581
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    78,909
    Quote Originally Posted by Shadowferal View Post
    https://twitter.com/RepAdamSchiff/st...rc=twsrc%5Etfw

    First, Trump said he wanted a trial in the Senate.

    Then, he said he wanted to hear from witnesses.

    Now, he wants the case dismissed — without either.

    The President is afraid of hearing from witnesses, but the Senate should not be.

    The American people deserve a fair trial.
    I really hope someone in DC is maintaining an expanding cabinet of sealed indictments for every single time this shitbird tries to interfere with Congress or ongoing investigations/cases by Justice.

    The day he's out of office, he should be hit with every single goddamned one of them, even if it takes a week to read them all out to him. I'd be willing to bet you could set the number in triple digits by now, at least.


  2. #10582
    Quote Originally Posted by Skroe View Post
    She should hold off and lay more traps for Trump. Create leverage.

    At the very least, push the trial past the State of the Union, and force Republicans to stand up and applaud their illegitimate and impeached President. Having the Trial and the rigged outcome before will just turn to SOTU into a Triumphalist moment, rather than the awkward trap it should be.

    If I had to bet, I think the plan is to do just that: put the complicit Republican accomplices in an impossible situation on live TV.

    If I were her, I would also announce the first or second week of January that the impeachment inquiry is ongoing and an additional article is coming.

    Siege tactics...
    I like how you guys get so worked up over the fact Republicans are doing the same thing democrats did. The democrats started impeach the motherfer after he was elected and have been on it ever since. No matter what they do, the senate will not remove the president. You can deny witnesses to another party and hypocritically whine for witnesses all you want, but it's not going to happen. All of this is being done to keep impeachment in the news because the democratic candidates are so weak that they need cover. After impeachment blows over people will have to really look at the extreme views the candidates are throwing out, so Nancy has to keep it in the news.

  3. #10583
    Quote Originally Posted by TexasRules View Post
    I like how you guys get so worked up over the fact Republicans are doing the same thing democrats did. The democrats started impeach the motherfer after he was elected and have been on it ever since. No matter what they do, the senate will not remove the president. You can deny witnesses to another party and hypocritically whine for witnesses all you want, but it's not going to happen. All of this is being done to keep impeachment in the news because the democratic candidates are so weak that they need cover. After impeachment blows over people will have to really look at the extreme views the candidates are throwing out, so Nancy has to keep it in the news.
    Republicans were allowed to call witnesses and did call witnesses in the House. Stop getting high on your own propaganda supply.

  4. #10584
    Quote Originally Posted by TexasRules View Post
    I like how you guys get so worked up over the fact Republicans are doing the same thing democrats did. The democrats started impeach the motherfer after he was elected and have been on it ever since. No matter what they do, the senate will not remove the president. You can deny witnesses to another party and hypocritically whine for witnesses all you want, but it's not going to happen. All of this is being done to keep impeachment in the news because the democratic candidates are so weak that they need cover. After impeachment blows over people will have to really look at the extreme views the candidates are throwing out, so Nancy has to keep it in the news.
    This isn't about removing Trump. That'll be done in the election.

    This is about inflicting damage.

    We've won by doing it and you lose by fighting it.

  5. #10585
    Quote Originally Posted by TexasRules View Post
    I like how you guys get so worked up over the fact Republicans are doing the same thing democrats did. The democrats started impeach the motherfer after he was elected and have been on it ever since. No matter what they do, the senate will not remove the president. You can deny witnesses to another party and hypocritically whine for witnesses all you want, but it's not going to happen. All of this is being done to keep impeachment in the news because the democratic candidates are so weak that they need cover. After impeachment blows over people will have to really look at the extreme views the candidates are throwing out, so Nancy has to keep it in the news.
    Which credible witness was denied?

  6. #10586
    Quote Originally Posted by Shadowferal View Post
    https://twitter.com/RepAdamSchiff/st...rc=twsrc%5Etfw

    First, Trump said he wanted a trial in the Senate.

    Then, he said he wanted to hear from witnesses.

    Now, he wants the case dismissed — without either.

    The President is afraid of hearing from witnesses, but the Senate should not be.

    The American people deserve a fair trial.
    Just another instance of Trump saying he'll face what is being brought against him, like when he said he would talk to Mueller and then wouldn't even do it for all the $100k paid prostitutes in all the land. He's all talk, but the moment he comes close to possibly going up against a trial he runs for the hills like this is a tangerine, geriatric cover of an Iron Maiden song.

    Also, don't forget Trump wanted the trial to go as long as possible, but then changed it to going as fast as possible.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by TexasRules View Post
    You can deny witnesses to another party and hypocritically whine for witnesses all you want, but it's not going to happen.
    Why do you keep saying this? Do you think if you say it enough those that know it to be false will suddenly believe you?

    All of this is being done to keep impeachment in the news because the democratic candidates are so weak that they need cover.
    Cover for what? Trump has accomplished near nothing and those "accomplishments" he touts have only fucked people over more than anything else.

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

  7. #10587
    Quote Originally Posted by Jotaux View Post
    Which credible witness was denied?
    The only witness denied was the whistleblower and that's because of the threats thrown at him by Trump and his allies.

  8. #10588
    Quote Originally Posted by TexasRules View Post
    The democrats started impeach the motherfer after he was elected and have been on it ever since.
    Isolated Democrats with no meaningful support have tried, yes. And if you bothered to pay any attention, you'd know that after Democrats took back the House in 2018 there was a very vocal and hard push for impeachment almost immediately after the session began.

    And if you bothered to pay any attention, you'd know that Nancy Pelosi repeatedly rebuffed those efforts and urged caution, patience, and refused to bend an inch to those demands.

    This is technically a true narrative, because there were issues of isolated Democrats calling for impeachment since January 2017. But in the context of the discussion is wildly dishonest and inaccurate and completely dismisses the year+ of Nancy Pelosi rebuffing attempt after attempt to force the issue and press forward with impeachment investigations. Because "impeach the motherfucker" may have been a celebrated line for some when Omar said it (I think it was her), but it has never been an official Democratic position.

  9. #10589
    Quote Originally Posted by Skroe View Post
    One of the central pillars of my conservatism is the elimination of moral relativism and reaffirming a shared sense of morality within our society. I do believe that moral decays is real and we're witnessesing its corrosive effects. And one of the sources of that morality is certainly religious. Where Connal gets it wrong though is that there has not been a degeneracy in the sources of moral influence. If anything, the secular moral examples of the past 70 years have only been a boon for enhancing a Moral center in society. The problem is that we've gone to complete shit at teaching children the value of a moral code, and societally impairing that code with consequences for violations. It's not a lack of existence, rather a failure to practice, that is at issue.
    To expand upon this, the modern Trump supporter reminds me of a devout follower or worshiper. They do not have a concrete moral or ethical code. Much like our ancestors, their moral code is guided by a single fickle being that their entire life revolves around.

    While society itself does not have a single ethical or moral code, we have a general idea of what is right and wrong in our society, as well as codified laws that set in stone what is definitely not ok.

    We are seeing certain people decline the existence of our codified laws to follow the words of a single person in defiance of those codified laws.

    This is why the impeachment will not go through even if it sorely needs to. I hope my fellow Americans will vote for the way of of sense, or our constitution really will be replaced by a false prophet.

  10. #10590
    The Lightbringer Clone's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Kamino
    Posts
    3,028
    Quote Originally Posted by Connal View Post
    It’s a combination of moderate people like him, and moderate people on the right who ultimately consented.... that concent is wavering because people like him don’t know when they have gone too far.
    Is there a moral arbiter to determine when it's too far?

  11. #10591
    Quote Originally Posted by Skroe View Post
    This isn't about removing Trump. That'll be done in the election.

    This is about inflicting damage.

    We've won by doing it and you lose by fighting it.
    On Thanksgiving, Trump was a +130 underdog to win reelection (with Bovada). As of December 26, they had him at -110. I guess you got your moral victory, but people that are putting money on the line sure don't seem to believe impeachment is inflicting damage to his reelection chances.

  12. #10592
    Quote Originally Posted by Spectral View Post
    On Thanksgiving, Trump was a +130 underdog to win reelection (with Bovada). As of December 26, they had him at -110. I guess you got your moral victory, but people that are putting money on the line sure don't seem to believe impeachment is inflicting damage to his reelection chances.
    Didn't those same betting sites have Hillary winning with large odds in her favor in 2016?

  13. #10593
    Quote Originally Posted by Edge- View Post
    Isolated Democrats with no meaningful support have tried, yes. And if you bothered to pay any attention, you'd know that after Democrats took back the House in 2018 there was a very vocal and hard push for impeachment almost immediately after the session began.

    And if you bothered to pay any attention, you'd know that Nancy Pelosi repeatedly rebuffed those efforts and urged caution, patience, and refused to bend an inch to those demands.

    This is technically a true narrative, because there were issues of isolated Democrats calling for impeachment since January 2017. But in the context of the discussion is wildly dishonest and inaccurate and completely dismisses the year+ of Nancy Pelosi rebuffing attempt after attempt to force the issue and press forward with impeachment investigations. Because "impeach the motherfucker" may have been a celebrated line for some when Omar said it (I think it was her), but it has never been an official Democratic position.
    I will give you credit for actually admitting truths, even though you brush them off as technicalities. Notice the liberals above you keep trying to push false narratives and such. However, you had a democratic congresswoman saying that people who already have made up their mind about impeachment should be recusing themselves. If that had happened during the house vote, there would be no impeachment. And Waters, Green, and others have been trying to impeach since the election, so I think you are discounting many of the angry democratic congressmen.

    There are 2 reasons Pelosi changed and went ahead with impeachment. First is that her base is skewing further left and they want impeachment. For months she said no and finally gave in--knowing full well it would die in the senate. Knowing It dies in the senate. Her second reason is that the democrat candidates are so weak, they have to keep impeachment in the news. Once impeachment leaves the news, what do these candidates talk about? Medicare for all? Healthcare for all illegal immigrants? Taking away fossil fuel jobs and making miners learn coding???? Seriously, they are killing themselves and the only thing keeping it out of the news is impeachment.

  14. #10594
    Quote Originally Posted by TexasRules View Post
    I will give you credit for actually admitting truths, even though you brush them off as technicalities. Notice the liberals above you keep trying to push false narratives and such. However, you had a democratic congresswoman saying that people who already have made up their mind about impeachment should be recusing themselves. If that had happened during the house vote, there would be no impeachment. And Waters, Green, and others have been trying to impeach since the election, so I think you are discounting many of the angry democratic congressmen.

    There are 2 reasons Pelosi changed and went ahead with impeachment. First is that her base is skewing further left and they want impeachment. For months she said no and finally gave in--knowing full well it would die in the senate. Knowing It dies in the senate. Her second reason is that the democrat candidates are so weak, they have to keep impeachment in the news. Once impeachment leaves the news, what do these candidates talk about? Medicare for all? Healthcare for all illegal immigrants? Taking away fossil fuel jobs and making miners learn coding???? Seriously, they are killing themselves and the only thing keeping it out of the news is impeachment.
    So that has nothing to do with the fact that Trump tried to get foreign help to win in 2020? it's all leftists trying to get him. Trump in the front lawn of the white house admitting to it and asking China to help him investigate the Bidens? Rudy going on TV admitting he was seeking dirt on the Biden for Trump multiple times? Mulvaney saying they do this all the time get over it? For your narrative to make sense you have to say that there is nothing fishy about what Trump did with Ukraine, are you 100% supportive of any president or candidate doing what Trump did?

    Let say for example it came out that Joe Biden is working with the EU to help him win in 2020 by launching a smear campaign against Trump you would be fine with that?

  15. #10595
    Quote Originally Posted by Skroe View Post
    This isn't about removing Trump. That'll be done in the election.

    This is about inflicting damage.

    We've won by doing it and you lose by fighting it.
    I'll take a wager to match that check you wrote your precious democratic party for doing what the founding fathers warned against and partisan impeaching. Does it still count as impeachment if you actually do not try to remove the President? Do you take your money back if they do not even try to remove him?

    You are sooooo overconfident, tell me which of these candidates can beat Trump. The only one who has a chance is Biden and he is single-handedly trying to take himself out. The socialists will lose simply by being socialist, the gay mayor can not win, that leaves Biden... who wants miners to learn coding?

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    I say so, the historical record says so. People have been bleating the same nonsense as you for, literally, more than a century. It's the same arguments that were raised in response to ending slavery. And then women's suffrage. And then the Civil Rights movement. And so forth. Always some claim of how this is a great societal decay, a bunch of violence by extremists in response, and then society continues on and improves significantly until the next injustice is to be addressed, and then the fearmongerers like yourself start up the whole thing all over again.

    You've never been right about this stuff.
    [Infraction]
    I like how I get banned for one off topic post earlier in this thread, the other 2 people arguing with you both get banned, but ex moderator also gets infracted for MULTIPLE off topic posts and doesn't get banned. Nice selective enforcement.

  16. #10596
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    78,909
    Quote Originally Posted by TexasRules View Post
    I like how I get banned for one off topic post earlier in this thread, the other 2 people arguing with you both get banned, but ex moderator also gets infracted for MULTIPLE off topic posts and doesn't get banned. Nice selective enforcement.
    I had zero infraction points before that infraction. It was a 5-point infraction, and bans don't trigger until you hit 15 points. I do not have multiple active infractions; that's simply untrue. I've got just the one, right now.

    As a point of fact, when I reported the derailing, I asked for that infraction you're pointing to. Specifically. I'd forgotten the thread warning, and had contributed, so I knew I deserved it.

    You really should get the facts before claiming some grand conspiracy.

    Sort of a descriptor of exactly why folks like yourself are frothing about Hunter Biden to try and distract from the impeachment; you can't speak any actual defense of the bad conduct, so you make up a story that has no real basis in fact, and pretend some grand double standard is in play, when the simple truth is that your story misrepresents the facts.

    How have you been posting here for 8.5 years and not figured out how the infraction system works? It's right in the rules; https://www.mmo-champion.com/faq.php...es_infractions

    I'm pretty sure that text hasn't changed in nearly that entire time, if at all.

    I'm not going to let you drag me into another derail about moderation. I made sure to tie this post in to the impeachment discussion, and I'm not going to respond further regarding moderation. Simply noting you don't actually know the facts in this particular case, and chose to spout off anyway while making stuff up.
    Last edited by Endus; 2020-01-01 at 10:47 PM.


  17. #10597
    I'm sure the founding fathers would find a lot about modern US to be grossly offensive. For fuck's sake, women are wearing pants.

    Regarding the presidency, impeachment was absolutely meant for someone like Trump. Not only has he be an incompetent leader, but he's went out of his way to corrupt the office. There's so many impeachable things to choose from. Whether its his sub/dom relationship with Putin or his funneling of taxpayer money into his own pocket. I don't think a single month has went by without him doing something that would have gotten any other president impeached and removed.

    Each founding father would look at what Trump has done and be thoroughly disgusted that such a person even became president in the first place.

    When it comes to Pelosi, republicans have no one to blame but themselves. McConnel and Graham admitted on live TV that they were going to break their oath and rig the trial. Want to be mad at someone? It sure as hell shouldn't be Pelosi.
    Last edited by Blur4stuff; 2020-01-01 at 11:19 PM.

  18. #10598
    Quote Originally Posted by Draco-Onis View Post
    Didn't those same betting sites have Hillary winning with large odds in her favor in 2016?
    Probably - all available evidence leading into election day suggested that she should have been something like a 3-1 favorite.

  19. #10599
    Quote Originally Posted by Spectral View Post
    Probably - all available evidence leading into election day suggested that she should have been something like a 3-1 favorite.
    The polling after the Comey bomb had her within the margin of error in most swing states so these sites not exactly the best place to hang your hat on.

  20. #10600
    Don't forget Trump lost by millions of votes to Hillary. She was incredibly disliked and as mentioned, Comey really fucked her over. Despite all of that, Trump barely squeaked by because of thousands of votes in a few states. At no point has Trump been liked or supported by a majority of voters.

    Trump has fewer republican supporters now than in 2016. His terrible performance as president has also energized the dem base well beyond what it was in 2016. Millions of independents that thought, "fuck it let's see what happens" won't vote for him again. Two big sources of republican votes come from boomers/silents and white men; two groups that have only shrunk since 2016.

    So where are the votes coming from that will give Trump a 2020 victory?

Posting Permissions

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