US Politics and Trump Category IV - I've never even heard of one that big before

[buka001]

See, you just have nothing. The Nazis were right.

I must say, at least you don't hide behind a false premises and claim you are a centrist etc.

 

[rietrot]

I must say, at least you don't hide behind a false premises and claim you are a centrist etc.

My views did shift a lot more to the centre actually. I geuss it is all the media I'm consuming as I find myself agreeing more with commentators that's centrist like Tim Pool and Sargon of Akkad.

 

[Unhappy438]

My views did shift a lot more to the centre actually. I geuss it is all the media I'm consuming as I find myself agreeing more with commentators that's centrist like Tim Pool and Sargon of Akkad.

Pim Tool got absolutely shredded by Sam Seder.

 

[rietrot]

Pim Tool got absolutely shredded by Sam Seder.

Ja, no. That guy is full of shît.

 

[Unhappy438]

Ja, no. That guy is full of shît.

I know, thats why he is Pim Tool.

 

[lumeer]

Gingerbeardman, I retract that you are a narcissist. I watched a video about narcissism and realised that you don't really fit any of the categories.

 

[Gingerbeardman]

Gingerbeardman, I retract that you are a narcissist. I watched a video about narcissism and realised that you don't really fit any of the categories.

Will wonders never cease.

Thanks for the retraction.

 

[cerebus]

Will Hurd's statement is depressing and predictable.

An impeachable offense should be compelling, overwhelmingly clear and unambiguous, and it is not something to be rushed or taken lightly. I have not heard evidence proving the president committed bribery or extortion. I also reject the notion that holding this view means supporting all of the foreign policy choices we have been hearing about over these last few weeks.

So, Trump definitely shouldn't have been using foreign aid to boost his private interests, but it's still not impeachable. Oh and we also need to investigate Burisma.

This will play out in the Senate trial in exactly the same way. There's always some new goalpost that needs to be met, even if the full picture of Trump's corruption has been established beyond any reasonable doubt.

The Case for Impeaching Trump Over Ukraine Is Already Complete

Lock him up (in a lengthy Senate trial).

slate.com

Donald Trump ordered that congressionally authorized military aid for Ukraine and an invitation to the White House for Ukraine’s president be withheld unless Ukraine made a public announcement that it was “investigating” Joe Biden’s son and various 2016 election conspiracy theories. These investigations would have benefited Trump politically but would not have advanced any U.S. policy interest.

If any part of that statement hasn't been proven, I've yet to see a single fact-based argument for it. And if such an abuse of power isn't impeachable, I can't imagine what could rise to the standard of removal. If Trump didn't have immunity from prosecution, he would already be making a plea bargain.

 

[Gingerbeardman]

Will Hurd's statement is depressing and predictable.



So, Trump definitely shouldn't have been using foreign aid to boost his private interests, but it's still not impeachable. Oh and we also need to investigate Burisma.

This will play out in the Senate trial in exactly the same way. There's always some new goalpost that needs to be met, even if the full picture of Trump's corruption has been established beyond any reasonable doubt.

The Case for Impeaching Trump Over Ukraine Is Already Complete

Lock him up (in a lengthy Senate trial).

slate.com

Donald Trump ordered that congressionally authorized military aid for Ukraine and an invitation to the White House for Ukraine’s president be withheld unless Ukraine made a public announcement that it was “investigating” Joe Biden’s son and various 2016 election conspiracy theories. These investigations would have benefited Trump politically but would not have advanced any U.S. policy interest.

If any part of that statement hasn't been proven, I've yet to see a single fact-based argument for it. And if such an abuse of power isn't impeachable, I can't imagine what could rise to the standard of removal. If Trump didn't have immunity from prosecution, he would already be making a plea bargain.

So not only will Trump not be impeached, but as you've so nicely pointed out, in a trial, Trump will have the opportunity to face his accusers, and so the Senate will have no choice but to investigate allll the Burisma nonsense, which will give Trump the opportunity to enter all of that information into the public record and nobody will be able to criticise him or to prevent him from doing so; it's not like the Republican controlled process is going to try hard to bring Trump to heel.

The Dems have walked into the most epic trap, perhaps the largest one in political history.

And incase you missed it:

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1197816995649138688

Preet Bharara is connected to some of the 302s. His blinking as he answers that question says it all.

 

[Emjay]

If any part of that statement hasn't been proven, I've yet to see a single fact-based argument for it. And if such an abuse of power isn't impeachable, I can't imagine what could rise to the standard of removal. If Trump didn't have immunity from prosecution, he would already be making a plea bargain.

I wish he didn't have immunity. It would be amazing to test all of this in a court.

So not only will Trump not be impeached, but as you've so nicely pointed out, in a trial, Trump will have the opportunity to face his accusers, and so the Senate will have no choice but to investigate allll the Burisma nonsense, which will give Trump the opportunity to enter all of that information into the public record and nobody will be able to criticise him or to prevent him from doing so; it's not like the Republican controlled process is going to try hard to bring Trump to heel.

The Dems have walked into the most epic trap, perhaps the largest one in political history.

And incase you missed it:

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1197816995649138688

Preet Bharara is connected to some of the 302s. His blinking as he answers that question says it all.

The Senate need to grow a pair now. That witness list is going to be very interesting.

So, what's next? A House vote, and then official proceedings start in the Senate?

 

[cerebus]

I wish he didn't have immunity. It would be amazing to test all of this in a court.

He is welcome to testify anytime he wants

 

[Gingerbeardman]

I wish he didn't have immunity. It would be amazing to test all of this in a court.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1197605638727184385

Well, it effectively will be...

 

[Gingerbeardman]

He is welcome to testify anytime he wants

So then at the Senate trial, right?

 

[greg0205]

Can we get a sticky in this thread showing what 435 divided by two is?

I feel it will be so, so helpful for folk who can’t math.

 

[rietrot]

Can we get a sticky in this thread showing what 435 divided by two is?

I feel it will be so, so helpful for folk who can’t math.

What are you on about?

 

[Emjay]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1197605638727184385

Well, it effectively will be...

No, the way in which evidence is presented, the type of evidence, lines of questioning are all very different. The amount of political grand standing from the last few weeks has been sickening. And it's not just from one side however. Every single witness was lead on in ways that is forbidden in the US court system. And hearsay evidence is only permitted under very exceptional circumstances. None of which are present in this case.

 

[greg0205]

What are you on about?

I’ll take what is a simple majority for $500 Alex.

 

[Emjay]

I’ll take what is a simple majority for $500 Alex.

Can you not ever just give a simple answer? This is exactly what I was talking about. I hope you don't grand stand like this IRL, because it's really off-putting.

 

[cerebus]

No, the way in which evidence is presented, the type of evidence, lines of question are all very different. The amount of political grand standing from the last few weeks has been sickening. And it's not just from one side however. Every single witness was lead on in ways that is forbidden in the US court system. And hearsay evidence is only permitted under very exceptional circumstances. None of which are present in this case.

Exactly which parts of the hearings this week relied on hearsay?

 

[greg0205]

Can you not ever just give a simple answer? This is exactly what I was talking about. I hope you don't grand stand like this IRL, because it's really off-putting.

The twelve seater dining table is being delivered this afternoon Em... the six seater was looking a little lost in all that space.