Page 11 of 12 FirstFirst ... 9101112 LastLast
Results 301 to 330 of 341

Thread: The Impeachment of President Trump

  1. #301
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Amsterdam/Istanbul
    Posts
    10,944
    Quote Originally Posted by Aimless View Post
    I believe Trump was partly elected on the back of such a policy, by dingdongs with tiny limp dingdongs.
    I'm curious if you ever stop to think what kind of effect your words have.
    Greece shows us that there is a kind of politician worse than the ones that break their election promises; the ones that keep their election promises.

  2. #302
    Quote Originally Posted by Hazir View Post
    I'm curious if you ever stop to think what kind of effect your words have.
    Very, very carefully, which is one reason why I typically delete my replies to you when you lie, bullshit, or just say something extremely dumb because you're itching to start a fight that nobody wants to have with you irl. If my post caused offense or hurt, I can apologize and edit it if you wish. If you are merely concerned that it reflects poorly on my character, please, don't worry—that bridge was crossed long ago.
    “Humanity's greatest advances are not in its discoveries, but in how those discoveries are applied to reduce inequity.”
    — Bill Gates

  3. #303
    Of course, if your real issue is with the claim that Trump was elected on such a platform, I'm afraid I can only reiterate that he was, indeed, elected on a platform that involved openly calling for the US to "take out" the families of terrorists, either because they shared responsibility—indirectly—for the acts of terror committed by their violent extremist family members, or because it is supposedly the only way to deter extremists who are willing to kill themselves in suicide attacks. That is the truth, and anyone who supports such policies is, arguably, a dingdong.

    “Humanity's greatest advances are not in its discoveries, but in how those discoveries are applied to reduce inequity.”
    — Bill Gates

  4. #304
    Quote Originally Posted by Khendraja'aro View Post
    Retaliating against the brother falls under something we call "Sippenhaft".

    Something the Nazis practiced a lot.
    Now now, they're identical twins, after all. Presumably Trump just can't tell them apart and no one wanted to risk him going on a tirade about the whistleblower still being around.
    Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"

  5. #305
    Quote Originally Posted by Dreadnaught View Post
    The House indicts and the Senate holds a trial, with the House making its case. The House determined that the witnesses they had were sufficient. They could have litigated whether certain White House officials were compelled to testify about whether the president's "state of mind" was "corrupt" but this would have been unprecedented in a number of ways, so they chose not to litigate this because they felt their case was sufficient.

    The fact that they now say their case wasn't strong enough to impeach without more witnesses either means they never thought it was a strong case, or they shouldn't have impeached.
    The House had sufficient evidence from their witnesses to indict and impeach. It then passed to the Senate, and they should have called witnesses as part of the *trial*. But it's hard to compel witnesses to testify when the executive branch directs them to defy/ignore subpoenas.

    Checks and balances are out the window, the impeachment process has failed, and Trump's abuse of power and contempt of congress continues. Republicans like to say the next election is the best way to hold Trump accountable...but then they jump on the Trump Re-Election Train. WTF

  6. #306
    Totally normal, the behavior of an innocent man:
    . https://www.washingtonpost.com/natio....co/JNH9ZTCRSa
    “Humanity's greatest advances are not in its discoveries, but in how those discoveries are applied to reduce inequity.”
    — Bill Gates

  7. #307
    News flash: the Impeachment process failed. The only "lesson" Trump learned (thanks to senate Republicans who failed to do their constitutional duty) was that a president can do anything he wants. He's beyond reproach and above the law. He's not just Commander in Chief but the Chief of Law Enforcement.

    He IS the nation, and anything he deems "good" for the country should be good enough. Dissenters are disloyal, unpatriotic traitors, sleezy slime balls....hiding in institutions like the FBI, Dept. of Justice, CIA, the State Dept....they're all part of the Deep State conspiracy. Also, Fake News!

    Yee haw, making America Great Again!

  8. #308
    https://thehill.com/policy/national-...ral-says-he-no

    On a friday night, at 10pm, during a pandemic. The actions of an innocent man everyone.
    Last edited by Ominous Gamer; 04-04-2020 at 01:40 PM.
    "In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."

  9. #309
    Attorneys for President Donald Trump this week will ask the U.S. Supreme Court to grant him sweeping immunity from investigation by Congress and local prosecutors into his conduct as a private citizen, as long as he's still in office.
    "Congress has already put me above the law, please put me above the Constitution as well." Fuck everything about this.

  10. #310
    I can't wait for him to shoot somebody on Fifth Ave.
    But in all seriousness, it doesn't matter what SCOTUS decides. The Senate is the only body of government that can act against him.
    .

  11. #311
    Principled conservatism etc
    “Humanity's greatest advances are not in its discoveries, but in how those discoveries are applied to reduce inequity.”
    — Bill Gates

  12. #312
    This is going to end in 1 of 2 ways, he is going to stay in power till he dies, or he is going to flee the country when someone does manage to remove him. Either way his kids are screwed.

    And y'all thought my suggestion of packing the SCOTUS under a dem majority was extreme. If this ruling goes any way but 9-0 that is exactly what we will need to start self correcting. Combine this with his DOJs opinion that those in power make the rules, and it's extremely clear that the GOP and conservatives are not acting in the interests of America.
    Last edited by Ominous Gamer; 05-11-2020 at 04:30 PM.
    "In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."

  13. #313
    “Humanity's greatest advances are not in its discoveries, but in how those discoveries are applied to reduce inequity.”
    — Bill Gates

  14. #314
    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    This is going to end in 1 of 2 ways, he is going to stay in power till he dies, or he is going to flee the country when someone does manage to remove him. Either way his kids are screwed.

    And y'all thought my suggestion of packing the SCOTUS under a dem majority was extreme. If this ruling goes any way but 9-0 that is exactly what we will need to start self correcting. Combine this with his DOJs opinion that those in power make the rules, and it's extremely clear that the GOP and conservatives are not acting in the interests of America.
    Power in the US under our 2-party system is a see-saw. Remember that anything you do to the other side the other side can later do to you. Let's not have each change of party start with packing the Supreme Court with more and more of their side. We should be trying to end the adversarial nature of our political system, not escalate it.

  15. #315
    Quote Originally Posted by Wraith View Post
    Power in the US under our 2-party system is a see-saw. Remember that anything you do to the other side the other side can later do to you. Let's not have each change of party start with packing the Supreme Court with more and more of their side. We should be trying to end the adversarial nature of our political system, not escalate it.
    Do you really believe the GOP won't do it if the Dems won't? The only reason they don't right now is because they don't need to. If I'm the Dems (and I control the Senate), I add a 10th judge and threaten to add more if the GOP doesn't agree to a constitutional limit to the size of the Court.
    Hope is the denial of reality

  16. #316
    Quote Originally Posted by Loki View Post
    Do you really believe the GOP won't do it if the Dems won't? The only reason they don't right now is because they don't need to.
    I believe they're going to have a much harder time getting away with it, unless the Dems do it first. Once the Democrats do it, Republican voters will be demanding the Republicans do it too. And come on, the standard should not be "as long as you're not worse​ than Trump might be, anything goes".

  17. #317
    They'll investigate Kavanaugh's suspicious payments before they even talk about packing the court.
    “Humanity's greatest advances are not in its discoveries, but in how those discoveries are applied to reduce inequity.”
    — Bill Gates

  18. #318
    Quote Originally Posted by Wraith View Post
    I believe they're going to have a much harder time getting away with it, unless the Dems do it first. Once the Democrats do it, Republican voters will be demanding the Republicans do it too. And come on, the standard should not be "as long as you're not worse​ than Trump might be, anything goes".
    *shrugs* The Republicans ALREADY started doing it. They started doing it when they insisted on blocking nominees they themselves had recommended as ideal candidates for an entire year.
    Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"

  19. #319
    Quote Originally Posted by Wraith View Post
    Power in the US under our 2-party system is a see-saw. Remember that anything you do to the other side the other side can later do to you. Let's not have each change of party start with packing the Supreme Court with more and more of their side. We should be trying to end the adversarial nature of our political system, not escalate it.
    Real party compromise died with the southern strategy. Anyone foolish enough to think the party that embraced Trump, or worse the party that supports McConnell, is going to roll over and start compromising is a fool that's only enabling them to continue their long tradition of moving the goal posts every chance they get.
    "In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."

  20. #320
    Quote Originally Posted by LittleFuzzy View Post
    *shrugs* The Republicans ALREADY started doing it. They started doing it when they insisted on blocking nominees they themselves had recommended as ideal candidates for an entire year.
    Yes, Republicans have done some bullshit, but escalation is not going to make it better. If everyone could stop trying to convince me that the other side would be just as bad as Trump if they had the chance, I'd appreciate it.

  21. #321
    False equivalence.
    “Humanity's greatest advances are not in its discoveries, but in how those discoveries are applied to reduce inequity.”
    — Bill Gates

  22. #322
    A) it's not escalation. It's the same thing. B) no it's not going to make things better. It's also not going to make things worse because Republicans are already doing it and they're not going to stop doing it.
    Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"

  23. #323
    It's not the same thing. Packing the court is a permanent change that's going to be nearly impossible to undo, stalling a nomination only lasts for that nomination. And again, "no worse than Trump" is a low bar, and should not be the goal, especially with how easy it seems to be rationalize "it's not as bad when we do it, because we're the good guys and they're the bad guys." The other side is thinking the same thing, and that needs to stop being an acceptable excuse for gradually creeping up the intensity of the political warfare.

  24. #324
    Hang on, I'm pretty sure stalling a nomination can impact politics for several generations. I'm also not sold on the notion that one side should play by the rules when it's to their detriment, while the other can freely choose to flout the rules whenever it's in their interest, with no penalty and no corrective mechanism. Everyone should play by the rules, and there must be effective means of countering abusive behavior, in order to safeguard the continued existence of a functioning, rule-based political order. This is a principle with broad applicability, even outside the circus that is American politics. Rule-breaking should be punished, and its consequences reversed if possible. There is no equivalence between the Democrats and the Republicans, at present, in these matters; one party is helping to destroy a political and social order governed by laws, rules, norms, principles—and the other is responsible for counteracting (and hopefully reversing) the harmful impact of those dangerous acts.
    “Humanity's greatest advances are not in its discoveries, but in how those discoveries are applied to reduce inequity.”
    — Bill Gates

  25. #325
    Quote Originally Posted by Aimless View Post
    Hang on, I'm pretty sure stalling a nomination can impact politics for several generations.
    I'm not trying to downplay how much bullshit it was, but there's a possibility of fixing it, and it doesn't have to be a permanent scar. It's fixable.

    I'm also not sold on the notion that one side should play by the rules when it's to their detriment, while the other can freely choose to flout the rules whenever it's in their interest, with no penalty and no corrective mechanism. Everyone should play by the rules, and there must be effective means of countering abusive behavior, in order to safeguard the continued existence of a functioning, rule-based political order. This is a principle with broad applicability, even outside the circus that is American politics. Rule-breaking should be punished, and its consequences reversed if possible. There is no equivalence between the Democrats and the Republicans, at present, in these matters; one party is helping to destroy a political and social order governed by laws, rules, norms, principles—and the other is responsible for counteracting (and hopefully reversing) the harmful impact of those dangerous acts.
    The only thing I'll disagree with here is the very last bit - I'd correct it as "the other has the opportunity to be responsible for counteracting (and hopefully reversing) the harmful impact of those dangerous acts." I'm increasingly worried that the opportunity is going to be passed by in favor of revenge.

    Building better safeguards against abusive behavior would be a fine goal, and I can get behind that. As long as it's not just seeking vengeance, but actually making sure that the abuses of power we've witnessed from Trump and the Republicans these past few years can never be repeated by anyone.

  26. #326
    It's got nothing to do with Trump. The two most egregious examples (outside of gerrymandering which is indeed thoroughly bipartisan) predate Trump's inauguration. What the Senate did after Scalia died and what the North Carolinan legislature did when the GOP lost the governor's seat to Roy Cooper. The only end to this is one of the party's collapsing and a new party rising from an opposition forming out of a new alignment of interests from that former party and the newly dominant party splintering at some of its edges. And if the collapsing opposition party is the Democrats rather than the Republicans who have been pushing these edges so much, I think there's a good chance that they don't let a new party form and our history as an open democracy will end. That could also happen if it's the GOP which collapses but I think it's more likely that we'll see the same restructuring we have in the past and some precedents on how far a weaker party can push with shenanigans to make up for its weaknesses.
    Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"

  27. #327
    Quote Originally Posted by Wraith View Post
    I believe they're going to have a much harder time getting away with it, unless the Dems do it first. Once the Democrats do it, Republican voters will be demanding the Republicans do it too. And come on, the standard should not be "as long as you're not worse​ than Trump might be, anything goes".
    Get away with it from whom? Other Republicans will cheer them on as they do it. And they don't give a damn about the rest. If anything, making the libs cry is a major goal of theirs.

    Quote Originally Posted by Aimless View Post
    They'll investigate Kavanaugh's suspicious payments before they even talk about packing the court.
    Not enough votes to impeach Kavanaugh.
    Hope is the denial of reality

  28. #328
    Stalling a nomination is bad, but packing the court is worse.

    Stalling a nomination is only able to affect one justice essentially and only if there's a vacancy before the election and only until after the election and only works if you win the next election.
    Packing a court allows you to override every other justice already there, does not require vacancies, is not time limited and can be done immediately after winning the previous election.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    ℬeing upset is understandable, but be upset at yourself for poor planning, not at the world by acting like a spoiled bitch during an interview.

  29. #329
    Quote Originally Posted by RandBlade View Post
    Stalling a nomination is bad, but packing the court is worse.

    Stalling a nomination is only able to affect one justice essentially and only if there's a vacancy before the election and only until after the election and only works if you win the next election.
    Packing a court allows you to override every other justice already there, does not require vacancies, is not time limited and can be done immediately after winning the previous election.
    Stalling a nomination was political because they didn't want a protracted media circus. The senate has always had the right to vote down any nominee to the courts. Democrats threw a fit about Garland because Republicans denied them the media circus they wanted.

  30. #330
    Quote Originally Posted by RandBlade View Post
    Stalling a nomination is bad, but packing the court is worse.

    Stalling a nomination is only able to affect one justice essentially and only if there's a vacancy before the election and only until after the election and only works if you win the next election.
    Packing a court allows you to override every other justice already there, does not require vacancies, is not time limited and can be done immediately after winning the previous election.
    Not stalling. Cancelling. The results are the same. And if the "need" arose, you can be sure the GOP would go the court-packing route. Democratic norms are dead. It's senseless for one party to put itself at a permanent disadvantage by pretending otherwise.

    Incidentally, "court packing" is explicitly allowed by the Constitution. Not having a vote is much more constitutionally dubious.
    Hope is the denial of reality

Posting Permissions

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