Miscellaneous And Off Topic Subjects

[Ghengis Jon]

Liney - Trump needs to be removed AS SOON AS POSSIBLE because he is a corrupt individual unfit for the office and a danger to this nation. Impeachment is a quicker remedy and should be attempted first solely for the sake of this nation. Yes, the cult of Trump will save him from impeachment removal. But that does not change the fact that he should be removed from office before the end of his term. Right or left doesn't matter - Trump is a clear and present danger to this nation. He needs to be removed as soon as possible by any legal means. If he were a Dem I would yelling just as loudly.

I beg to differ with Jeff on the substance of the charges. They clearly rise to not only a level of impeachment, but also to the standard for removal. 1st of all, we all breathe air. It doesn't matter if you hear that 1st, 2nd, 3rd or 4th hand - it is still the truth and how that info coming to you X-hand is irrelevant. It remains the truth. And the reason some claim the evidence is weak on the first article is because of the obstruction committed and outlined in the second article.

Imho, the 1st article is the weaker, predominantly because Trump engagement in charges outlined in the second article. If Trump had not ordered the ILLEGAL AND UNCONSTITUTIONAL obstruction of subpoenaed witnesses and documents, we would have all facts in front of us (a 15 minute trial) and no 2nd article of impeachment. The Constitution clearly lays out the checks and balances. To publicly, clearly, with foresight and malice, obstruct investigation(s) as part of that check and balance is grounds for removal. You swear to uphold the Constitution and when you wipe your ass with it, you should be removed.

In 2016 we had Jeffery Epstein and Eva Braun as the 2 candidates for president. There is no excuse or rationale for the Rs and Ds to have inflicted that kind of travesty on America. It is why we are at where we are. In 2020, we now have an unchained Jeffery Epstein who believes he is immune from the law versus a currently undefined opponent. It is an election that only the Dems could lose. For the sake of the nation Dems, don't fuck this up. By offering Eva last time around, you inflicted upon the USA a traitorous grifter that is worshiped by the mentally ill. Stop that. Don't do that again.

Only a couple more weeks until President OJ gets acquitted by his cult and we get to hear sycophants claim exoneration. Then Trump can go back to his exquisite Kwame imitation of graft and self indulgence.

[Dr. Strangelove]

Two things: in the current debate, we lose sight of what House Democrats fashioned as articles of impeachment. Namely, abuse of power and obstruction of Congress. That's it. Narrowly stayed with no direct questioning of any of his distasteful conduct as an indicator of his unfitness to be the US president. The Ukraine affair? Business as usual described as both illegal (its not) and an unseemly abuse of power intended to serve Trump's personal political purposes. Maybe it is, but difficult to assert on reasonable technical grounds. That's because evidence presented by the House to support the charge of abuse of power is both second hand and circumstantial and that avoids the constitutional question that the President, in support of US national interests, allows him to do anything he wants that isn't illegal.Unfortunately, that, as frustrating as it is to anti-Trumpsters, is not something impeachment, an entirely political process, involves.

So, that brings us to this. The charges currently before the Senate do not rise to the level of an impeachable offense. Period. House Democrats are responsible for that by failing to focus on what is his reprehensible conduct as US president. that which could have been articulately cataloged, that indicates he is unfit to hold that office. All the rest, all the charges and speculation floating around and as articulated by a clearly biased press, are a waste of the Senate's and the American public's time.

So basically you think trump could've been impeached on general charges of "unfitness" which in your mind is basically the name-calling, tantrum-throwing, etc.? You think THAT is more substantive than charges related to asking a foreign country to intervene and give you an investigation your own DOJ won't do? Seriously?

[Dr. Strangelove]

If Trump is re-elected, the Dems will blame everyone but themselves. Just like they've done since November 2016.

If Trump is reelected the first people to blame, first and foremost, are the people who voted for him. After that you can start blaming the Dems.

Look, you know there's a bit of a "cry wolf" issue here too right. The Democratic base has become desensitized to having its nominees called socialists by the Republican Party. It doesn't matter who they nominate, the Republicans are going to label them a wild-eyed, Marxist. Biden is already being called a socialist. An extreme leftist. Every Dem going back to at least FDR has been called a socialist, a communist, etc. by people of your political persuasion, so now that when there's a for-real, legit one like Sanders, should we be surprised when the Dem base doesn't take the accusations seriously?

[Dr. Strangelove]

"He has not paid the price YET"

Remember when Republican Senators shook their heads in disgust because Schiff referenced a report that Trump is threatening people to get his way? Not in disgust at Trump's conduct, but because Schiff was behaving "outrageously" in citing the news story.

These are the people Jeff suggests might remove Trump over a general "unfitness" charge? Come on, man

[Dr. Strangelove]

Latest WP/ABC poll shows Biden & Sanders breaking away from the pack nationally. Biden at 32%, Sanders at 23%. Warren's support has dropped significantly since October.

EDIT: I've seen enough polling at this point to say that Warren may have sunk her candidacy with her "Bernie told me a woman can't beat Trump" gambit.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...455_story.html

[iam416]

The Democratic base has become desensitized to having its nominees called socialists by the Republican Party. It doesn't matter who they nominate, the Republicans are going to label them a wild-eyed, Marxist

I don't think that's true. I think the Ds LIKE socialiasm right now.

But, it is very akin to every R nominee being labeled a racist.

[iam416]

If Trump had not ordered the ILLEGAL AND UNCONSTITUTIONAL obstruction of subpoenaed witnesses and documents,

I hate to break it to you, but challenging subpoenas in court is neither illegal nor unconstitutional. And when the Executive challenges Legislative subpoenas in the Judicial branch, the act is, in fact, fundamentally ESSENTIAL to our concept of separation of powers. The fact that the Ds didn't want to wait until the court process ran it's course is their prerogative. It doesn't make going to court or appealing the decision illegal or uncontitutiional.

That Article is total fucking god awful bullshit that should be rejected 100-0. Instead it'll be 53-47 meaning that Democrats do NOT think that the Executive can seek refuge in the Courts from Legislative inquiry. Given that the Ds want to destroy most of the Constitution, that doesn't surprise me.

[iam416]

"He has not paid the price YET"

Remember when Republican Senators shook their heads in disgust because Schiff referenced a report that Trump is threatening people to get his way? Not in disgust at Trump's conduct, but because Schiff was behaving "outrageously" in citing the news story.

Gotta really read a lot into that, Boss. FTR, we know Schiff is a liar. We know his "memo" in response to Nunes was chalk full of known lies. We know Schiff did everything he could to push the preposterous Steele Dossier.

Doesn't mean he's always a liar, but it does mean he is a lockstep D partisan and the face of the 3+ year impeachment efforts.

[lineygoblue]

If Trump is reelected the first people to blame, first and foremost, are the people who voted for him. After that you can start blaming the Dems.

Absolutely wrong. You could not be more wrong on this. If Dems fail to give the electorate a strong, viable candidate that appeals to the very large moderate (swing vote) base in this country, the blame will rest firmly on their party leaders, when they lose. But they will blame others. That's their history, that's what they do best.

Trump won in 2016 because enough of the moderate swing vote decided to give him a chance, instead of rerturning the Clinton family in the WH. We already knew Hillary, and all the lies, deceit and blaming others that took part in Bubba's presidency. In addition, Hillary went on record stating that those who opposed her were "deplorable". It doesn't even matter if that quote was taken out of text, or somehow misquoted. You don't blast the voters that you need to swing the election to your side. You don't tell WV coal miners that you want to eliminate the coal industry. How many times did Hillary go to places like North Carolina, Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Missouri to campaign? Those states swung the election to Trump.

I remember when GWB was running for his 2nd term, and he went to a large NAACP gathering here in Michigan. He was invited to speak, and he accepted. He knew when he accepted the invitation that 99.9% of the people in that room hated his guts, but he went there anyway, and asked them to vote for him. Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson were sitting right behind him when he asked the group for their votes. He knew he wasn't going to get their votes, but he tried anyway.

Hillary thought she could win the presidency out of some sense of entitlement, (it was her turn) and she spent too much time campaigning in states that were already safely in her corner. She lost because she failed to appeal to the large moderate swing vote, and it looks like the Democratic party may be getting ready to do the same thing all over again.

[iam416]

Meanwhile, in Iowa the latest poll (NYT/Siena) had Bernie up by 7 -- outside the margin of error. The same poll had every D losing to PDJT and Sanders losing to PDJT by 6 -- outside the margin of error.

Also, in NH, the latest poll out this morning has Sanders up by 9.

If he wins both states then it's a going to be a real battle and the unthinkable could happen -- Sanders v PDJT. My political views have been creeping toward malevolence for all involved. If that's the race then it'll go from a creep to a sprint.

Most importantly, however, is that you don't call Sanders a Socialist. Call him a Communist. It's more accurate.

[lineygoblue]

Remember when Republican Senators shook their heads in disgust because Schiff referenced a report that Trump is threatening people to get his way? Not in disgust at Trump's conduct, but because Schiff was behaving "outrageously" in citing the news story.

Wrong. According to Susan Collins, one of the Never Trumpers that Dems are supposed to be trying to swing their way, she shook her head "no" and actually said out loud "that's wrong" when Schiff said that she and other Republicans were threatened by Trump to 'put their heads on a pike" if they didn't support him in the trial. Schiff lied, and actually hurt his case when he made this baseless accusation. Which is akin to many other of his accusations.

Edit: If anyone would admit that they were 'threatened' by Trump for their support, it would be someone like Collins, Romney or Murkowski. Trump didn't threaten them. Schiff lied. That's what caused the Republican senators to shake their heads in disgust. And instead of strengthening his case, he weakened. it.

[Dr. Strangelove]

Wrong. According to Susan Collins, one of the Never Trumpers that Dems are supposed to be trying to swing their way, she shook her head "no" and actually said out loud "that's wrong" when Schiff said that she and other Republicans were threatened by Trump to 'put their heads on a pike" if they didn't support him in the trial. Schiff lied, and actually hurt his case when he made this baseless accusation. Which is akin to many other of his accusations.

Edit: If anyone would admit that they were 'threatened' by Trump for their support, it would be someone like Collins, Romney or Murkowski. Trump didn't threaten them. Schiff lied. That's what caused the Republican senators to shake their heads in disgust. And instead of strengthening his case, he weakened. it.

Schiff didn't "lie" there, he brought up a news article and explicitly said he didn't know if it was true or not, as I recall. For any Republican Senator to be angry over that but has no comments on the dozens of insults Trump tosses out daily, well...

Collins was looking for a reason to dismiss Schiff's entire presentation as partisan and unfortunately he gave it to her at the very end. By referencing a news story. Murkowski said Schiff was doing a really good job up till then...as if that moment ruined the entire presentation.

[lineygoblue]

So the Schiff strategy was to butter up the Never Trumpers and regale them with his oratory skills, right up until the last minute when he told them that he couldn't trust them to do the right thing.

Okay. Great plan.

Plans like that will cost them the election. Again.

[Dr. Strangelove]

Meanwhile, in Iowa the latest poll (NYT/Siena) had Bernie up by 7 -- outside the margin of error. The same poll had every D losing to PDJT and Sanders losing to PDJT by 6 -- outside the margin of error.

Also, in NH, the latest poll out this morning has Sanders up by 9.

If he wins both states then it's a going to be a real battle and the unthinkable could happen -- Sanders v PDJT. My political views have been creeping toward malevolence for all involved. If that's the race then it'll go from a creep to a sprint.

Most importantly, however, is that you don't call Sanders a Socialist. Call him a Communist. It's more accurate.

We'll see how things shake out but the Iowa poll with Bernie having that big a lead seems to be a bit of an outlier. I've seen a lot written about the age samples in these polls and the more you sample older voters, the more they skew Biden. Traditionally primary voters tend to skew older than the general election but there's no guarantee that'll happen in Iowa obviously.

[Dr. Strangelove]

So the Schiff strategy was to butter up the Never Trumpers and regale them with his oratory skills, right up until the last minute when he told them that he couldn't trust them to do the right thing.

Okay. Great plan.

Plans like that will cost them the election. Again.

There's not one Republican Senator in that chamber that has ever considered removing Trump. Not one. Schiff could've dazzled em Daniel Webster style, or taken a shit on the rug, it would not have made a difference in the end. The Seantors moaning about him citing that article are just building cover for themselves to seem "reasonable". "Oh Schiff was putting up a good case but then he made that head on a pike comment and made me flip back to protect Trump at all costs". Do they actually think the American public is dumb enough to buy -- well, I take that back. We elected Trump, after all.