[Split Thread] A second impeachment - Page 71

Skeptic Ginger · 16th February 2021, 12:13 AM

Originally Posted by dirtywick

Yes I do think it would have mattered, his lawyers were completely outclassed and unprepared. Their opening remarks flipped one Senator alone.

Maybe they'd want to hear from Mark Meadows and Raffensperger on the GA call? Want to see Trump's phone records from Jan 6? Who else did he call that we don't know about? What did Trump and Pence talk about after the riot? Was the pentagon told to deliberately scale down the national guard presence and response? On who's orders?

They could have asked this stuff and figured out what happened.

Do you honestly think those GOP Senators weren't convinced Trump was guilty?

As for who ordered what, you won't find Trump's fingerprints on any smoking gun. That's going to come out with the investigation. Trump's like a mob boss that keeps his orders one step removed.

Segnosaur · 16th February 2021, 12:24 AM

Originally Posted by dirtywick

Yes I do think it would have mattered, his lawyers were completely outclassed and unprepared. Their opening remarks flipped one Senator alone.

As another poster asked... do you really think that any republican senator would have changed their vote based on the evidence?

If so, I have a bridge to sell you.

Seriously, they could have a video recording of Trump talking to Putin about how he hoped more police officers would have been killed in is plans to install a dictatorship, and the majority of republican senators would still vote to acquit.

Quote:

Maybe they'd want to hear from Mark Meadows and Raffensperger on the GA call?

Recordings of the call have already been made public. I doubt any senator was unaware of their contents.

Quote:

Want to see Trump's phone records from Jan 6? Who else did he call that we don't know about?

Senators already had enough information to convict Trump on the facts. While that sort of information should be revealed, it would not have been required to illustrate Trump was guilty. We already had more than enough evidence of that.

Quote:

What did Trump and Pence talk about after the riot? Was the pentagon told to deliberately scale down the national guard presence and response? On who's orders?

They could have asked this stuff and figured out what happened.

All that stuff should be revealed. And the proper forum to do that is a full inquiry (either by the senators themselves, or by something like the Mueller report). A proper accounting of events will probably take months... more time than is practical during an impeachment trial. (And not only that, such a long, drawn-out trial would likely make the proceedings lose its impact with the voting public.)

PhantomWolf · 16th February 2021, 03:16 AM

Originally Posted by dirtywick

fine, the charges weren't even in the same league and Clinton was popular, Trump was unpopular and used the office of the president to try and kill people.

And both times we had Republicans that, except for a handful, were more interested in toeing the party line and keeping their jobs than in determining if the President's actions were a threat to the office. That is why out of 55, 50 Republicans voted to find Clinton guilty, and why 43 of 50 voted to acquit Trump. Clinton was popular among Democrats and unpopular with Republicans. Likewise, Trump was unpopular with Democrats, but extremely popular still among Republicans. See how that works? Republican Senators vote with whether their base liked the President or not, not were what he did was impeachable or not. Because it's all about keeping their jobs. If you think that anything was going to change it more than it did, you are seriously living in a land of delusion.

Quote:

I mean, if you think they did a good job that's cool. They had the power to do a proper impeachment this time and didn't really do anything with it. If they were just going to give a couple of speeches and show a video and not really try and change anyone's mind they could have censured him.

Ahh, bless your heart, you really believe that the sniveling cowards that are Republican Senators would really change their minds and get themselves primaried by the rabid Trumpers and nonsensical QAnons just because more people got up and said "He did it!" How special, and naive. The craven Republicans know what Trump did, even the suck-ups like Senator "Perhaps my father was involved in the Kennedy assassination" Cruz, and Senator "Let me help with that Insurrection" Hawley know that Trump's guilt is so far beyond a reasonable doubt that it can almost see Russia from its doorstep.

They don't care that he's guilty, all they care about is appeasing the mob that is Trumpers and QAnon and so not losing their jobs next primary season. No amount of witness testimony will change that. Heck, they were there, they were the targets of the mob. Trump set that mob on them, and they don't care because it's not politically convenient to care. And if you aren't willing to understand this, then you are deluding yourself, so stop blaming that delusion on the Democrats.

dirtywick · 16th February 2021, 05:32 AM

Originally Posted by Stacyhs

This wasn't about Trump's guilt or innocence for the GOP. That was obvious with their fixation on the "constitutionality" excuse. It was about finding an excuse to NOT find him guilty. You are living in La La Land if you think ANTHING the House Managers could have brought in would have changed ten more GOP votes.

Bill Cassidy changed his vote after the opening remarks.

You guys are ignoring that, but I'm in La La Land, I'm special, I'm naive, I'll buy a bridge? They never would have flipped their votes? One of them did.

Whatever, you guys are out of line.

Pacal · 16th February 2021, 11:24 AM

Originally Posted by dirtywick

Bill Cassidy changed his vote after the opening remarks.

You guys are ignoring that, but I'm in La La Land, I'm special, I'm naive, I'll buy a bridge? They never would have flipped their votes? One of them did.

Whatever, you guys are out of line.

The chances of convicting Trump were minimal because of the lack of backbone by most Republicans. Remember Mitch afterwards said Trump was guilty but it was unconstitutional to hold an Impeachment Trial with Trump no longer in office. Which is A) pathetic and B) false and easily demonstrated to be so. And of course Mitch was the main reason the trial was held after Trump was in office. Of course Mitch damn well knows the actual law but was looking for and setting up an excuse to not convict Trump. In this he was joined by it appears most of the Republican Senators. The absolutely disgusting boot licking behavior of Graham is of course remarkable in it shows that a man without a spine can walk.

Was it impossible to convince enough Republican Senators? Of course not. Utterly improbable events do happen like being struck by a meteor or winning the lottery twice!!

Getting enough Republicans to join in convicting Trump was on the same order of very low probability to winning the lottery twice etc! It was and remains obvious to me that the great majority of Republican Senators like Mitch and Graham would have seized virtually any excuse to acquit just like how Mitch did. And the fact that previously 45 Republican Senators tried to stop the trial on the grounds it was unconstitutional, a completely bogus and easily shown to be so excuse, shows just how much Republican Senators have become beholden to the GOP - now Trump's party.

In the end it appears two Republicans minds seemed to have changed, (Personal integrity at last!), but getting anymore? a desperate uphill struggle against submission to the Orange one and perceived political self interest.

So yeah I think you are a bit naive about the whole thing.

Meadmaker · 16th February 2021, 11:30 AM

Originally Posted by turingtest

Those reactionaries aren't declaring war just against Democrats who might think it's worthwhile trying to meet them halfway, they're declaring war against members of their own party who won't toe their line (Politico via MSN):

The "big tent" GOP doesn't even have room in their own party for diversity of opinion; just more evidence that the folks who mouth "unity!" at anyone outside of it isn't talking about unity at all, they're demanding nothing less than unconditional surrender.

These "censure" votes are really scary to me. Ok maybe that's an exaggeration, but they definitely make me nervous. Is there precedent for this sort of thing? I've never heard of it. I know that they are just symbolic votes, but the idea of taking a formal vote to criticize an elected representative for voting the wrong way just gives me the creeps. It just has a huge authoritarian vibe to it, more than just voting someone out of a primary would have.

alfaniner · 16th February 2021, 12:13 PM

Originally Posted by Meadmaker

These "censure" votes are really scary to me. Ok maybe that's an exaggeration, but they definitely make me nervous. Is there precedent for this sort of thing? I've never heard of it. I know that they are just symbolic votes, but the idea of taking a formal vote to criticize an elected representative for voting the wrong way just gives me the creeps. It just has a huge authoritarian vibe to it, more than just voting someone out of a primary would have.

Both the censure and the impeachment dams have been broken. While they were rarely invoked before, now it's going to be happening all the time, for the slightest (and even nonexistent) offenses.

Skeptic Ginger · 16th February 2021, 12:29 PM

Originally Posted by dirtywick

Bill Cassidy changed his vote after the opening remarks.

You guys are ignoring that, but I'm in La La Land, I'm special, I'm naive, I'll buy a bridge? They never would have flipped their votes? One of them did.

Whatever, you guys are out of line.

Whoopteedo, one guy from a swing state changed his vote.

Stacyhs · 16th February 2021, 02:27 PM

Originally Posted by dirtywick

Bill Cassidy changed his vote after the opening remarks.

You guys are ignoring that, but I'm in La La Land, I'm special, I'm naive, I'll buy a bridge? They never would have flipped their votes? One of them did.

Whatever, you guys are out of line.

ONE. Let's repeat that: ONE. Out of 44. So, yes. You're in La La Land, naive, and don't let a bridge salesman anywhere near you unless you want to be the proud owner of one.

Vixen · 16th February 2021, 02:43 PM

Originally Posted by Bubba

Imagine if Officer Sicknick texted his brother, after the Jan 6 riot:

"I got pepper sprayed a couple times, but I'm in good shape."

https://www.nationalreview.com/2021/...yFiE4eOhH-6s_E

It has been known for concussed individuals to not realise how serious their condition is straightaway.

dirtywick · 16th February 2021, 03:05 PM

Originally Posted by Stacyhs

ONE. Let's repeat that: ONE. Out of 44. So, yes. You're in La La Land, naive, and don't let a bridge salesman anywhere near you unless you want to be the proud owner of one.

But I thought R were never going to change their minds? Now it’s big deal one did? Maybe with some proper investigation and evidence it could have been more. There’s evidence it’s possible because it happened right in front of you. Who can say, they didn’t try.

like I said earlier I don’t mind if anyone thinks they did a good job with the impeachment. no need to be a jerk about it

Skeptic Ginger, Bill Cassidy is a senator from LA. Is that a swing state

dirtywick · 16th February 2021, 03:10 PM

Originally Posted by Pacal

The chances of convicting Trump were minimal because of the lack of backbone by most Republicans. Remember Mitch afterwards said Trump was guilty but it was unconstitutional to hold an Impeachment Trial with Trump no longer in office. Which is A) pathetic and B) false and easily demonstrated to be so. And of course Mitch was the main reason the trial was held after Trump was in office. Of course Mitch damn well knows the actual law but was looking for and setting up an excuse to not convict Trump. In this he was joined by it appears most of the Republican Senators. The absolutely disgusting boot licking behavior of Graham is of course remarkable in it shows that a man without a spine can walk.

Was it impossible to convince enough Republican Senators? Of course not. Utterly improbable events do happen like being struck by a meteor or winning the lottery twice!!

Getting enough Republicans to join in convicting Trump was on the same order of very low probability to winning the lottery twice etc! It was and remains obvious to me that the great majority of Republican Senators like Mitch and Graham would have seized virtually any excuse to acquit just like how Mitch did. And the fact that previously 45 Republican Senators tried to stop the trial on the grounds it was unconstitutional, a completely bogus and easily shown to be so excuse, shows just how much Republican Senators have become beholden to the GOP - now Trump's party.

In the end it appears two Republicans minds seemed to have changed, (Personal integrity at last!), but getting anymore? a desperate uphill struggle against submission to the Orange one and perceived political self interest.

So yeah I think you are a bit naive about the whole thing.

Maybe. Perhaps several more would have changed in the face of greater evidence and public pressure. Would have been nice to find out.

Skeptic Ginger · 16th February 2021, 03:15 PM

Originally Posted by dirtywick

... Skeptic Ginger, Bill Cassidy is a senator from LA. Is that a swing state

Believe it or not, yes when it comes to Senators.

Wiki

They've had almost all Democratic Senators from 1876 until 2005. Cassidy's immediate predecessor was a Democrat, Mary Landrieu.

acbytesla · 16th February 2021, 03:28 PM

Originally Posted by Vixen

It has been known for concussed individuals to not realise how serious their condition is straightaway.

I got knocked out cold playing football in high school. After they gave me smelling salts to wake me up I begged to get back on the field. Thank ~~God~~ science that the coaches wouldn't let me. Later after the game I began to vomit and passed out again.

I was in the ICU for 3 days.

Segnosaur · 16th February 2021, 03:36 PM

Originally Posted by dirtywick

But I thought R were never going to change their minds? Now it’s big deal one did? Maybe with some proper investigation and evidence it could have been more. There’s evidence it’s possible because it happened right in front of you. Who can say, they didn’t try.

First of all, that's one senator... it took 4 days of trial to convince him to vote to convict. At that rate it would take another month and a half to convince the other 10 or so republicans.

It should also be pointed out that while other posters were wrong about Cassidy being from a swing state, he himself used to be a democrat. (I am sure his current allegiences are to the GOP, but it does mean he might not be as "hard core" as long-term repubilcans.) And he also regularly voted against Trump in congress. (he did not support overturning the votes in Arizona/Penn, he voted to restrict Trump from taking military action in Iran without congressional approval, and voted to keep troops in Afghanistan/Syria.) So Cassidy voting against Trump is not THAT surprising.

Lastly... keep in mind that he did not technically "switch" his vote... the 2 votes were for different things... was the impeachment constitutional, and was Trump guilty. Yes, most senators would have probably considered them close to "the same", but if someone had some integrity in accepting the results of the first vote, its possible that the second vote will go from a no to a yes.

Segnosaur · 16th February 2021, 03:37 PM

Originally Posted by dirtywick

Maybe. Perhaps several more would have changed in the face of greater evidence and public pressure. Would have been nice to find out.

Yes, because the American public NEVER loses interest in anything, regardless of how long it goes on.

(sarcasm intended)

Segnosaur · 16th February 2021, 07:19 PM

And, the republican infighting has begun...

From: CBC (Canuck broadcasting corporation)
Former U.S. president Donald Trump lashed out at Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell on Tuesday, signalling a growing feud between the two most important voices in the Republican Party. "Mitch is a dour, sullen and unsmiling political hack, and if Republican Senators are going to stay with him, they will not win again," Trump said in a statement released through his political action committee amid the fallout over his second impeachment trial.

So despite the fact that Moscow Mitch provided cover for Trump over 4 years, and voted not to impeach him (twice), Trump attacked him. Hopefully re-enforcing the lesson to all of Trump's boot-lickers... any "loyalty" from trump only works when you are completely subservient.

Stacyhs · 16th February 2021, 07:54 PM

Originally Posted by dirtywick

But I thought R were never going to change their minds? Now it’s big deal one did? Maybe with some proper investigation and evidence it could have been more. There’s evidence it’s possible because it happened right in front of you. Who can say, they didn’t try.

like I said earlier I don’t mind if anyone thinks they did a good job with the impeachment. no need to be a jerk about it

Skeptic Ginger, Bill Cassidy is a senator from LA. Is that a swing state

No, YOU are making it a big deal that ONE did.

I agree, no need to be a jerk about it. So stop digging the hole any deeper. It's been obvious from the beginning that this impeachment, just like the first one, was going nowhere because the current GOP is the PARTY OF TRUMP and as long as the GOP senators are up his ass, it will continue to be.

Minoosh · 16th February 2021, 08:17 PM

Originally Posted by Segnosaur

And, the republican infighting has begun...

From: CBC (Canuck broadcasting corporation)
Former U.S. president Donald Trump lashed out at Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell on Tuesday, signalling a growing feud between the two most important voices in the Republican Party. "Mitch is a dour, sullen and unsmiling political hack, and if Republican Senators are going to stay with him, they will not win again," Trump said in a statement released through his political action committee amid the fallout over his second impeachment trial.

Trump didn't write that! It's rewarding seeing his words muffled by his own PAC.

His original statement would have closer to "Mitch is a LOSER and anyone pathetic enough to support him will be a LOSER in 2022. Sad!"

Skeptic Ginger · 16th February 2021, 08:58 PM

Originally Posted by Minoosh

Trump didn't write that! It's rewarding seeing his words muffled by his own PAC.

His original statement would have closer to "Mitch is a LOSER and anyone pathetic enough to support him will be a LOSER in 2022. Sad!"

No kidding. Have we ever seen Trump use the words dour and sullen? It's laughable.

Norman Alexander · 16th February 2021, 09:02 PM

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

No kidding. Have we ever seen Trump use the words dour and sullen? It's laughable.

He's most likely heard those words addressed to him. Perhaps he thinks they are "good" words.

dirtywick · 16th February 2021, 09:40 PM

Originally Posted by Stacyhs

No, YOU are making it a big deal that ONE did.

I agree, no need to be a jerk about it. So stop digging the hole any deeper. It's been obvious from the beginning that this impeachment, just like the first one, was going nowhere because the current GOP is the PARTY OF TRUMP and as long as the GOP senators are up his ass, it will continue to be.

That's the whole point. This was a really good chance for the dems to get the GOP senators out of his ass, evidence by the fact several of them did get out of his ass, including one after hearing the defense arguments. You guys are so convinced that it's impossible when that low effort impeachment trial pulled in 7 R votes, including one guy in a safely red district who just won his reelection changed his mind when he heard the defense.

His defense was head over heels trying to avoid talking about election fraud claims and the dems didn't see particularly interested in that either. They were asking specific questions about when Trump knew about the attack and what he was doing, they simply didn't answer them and they were content with leaving it at that. Nobody wants to know exactly why it took so long to get help? Who else knew the president was going to send a crowd down there to disrupt the proceedings and did they deliberately leave it unprotected, and for what reason?

You think I'm digging a hole because I think they should have tried to get answers to those questions. That's fine, I don't particularly like the take that since they were going to lose and it was delaying legislation that phoning it in was OK. But, that's what they did.

This isn't a productive conversation for me anymore so I have nothing further to add.

The Great Zaganza · 16th February 2021, 09:53 PM

For the GOP Donor Class, it should be easy to choose between the guy who was just reelected for 6 years and the guy who was not.

Beelzebuddy · 16th February 2021, 10:00 PM

Originally Posted by dirtywick

That's the whole point. This was a really good chance for the dems to get the GOP senators out of his ass, evidence by the fact several of them did get out of his ass, including one after hearing the defense arguments. You guys are so convinced that it's impossible when that low effort impeachment trial pulled in 7 R votes, including one guy in a safely red district who just won his reelection changed his mind when he heard the defense.

If the GOP hadn't been spending years perfecting the Lucy Football approach to bipartisanship, you might have had a point. They're willing to seem reasonable only when it doesn't make any difference in the outcome. If the impeachment vote was a simple majority, not a one of them would have turned coat.

Pacal · 16th February 2021, 10:28 PM

Originally Posted by dirtywick

That's the whole point. This was a really good chance for the dems to get the GOP senators out of his ass, evidence by the fact several of them did get out of his ass, including one after hearing the defense arguments. You guys are so convinced that it's impossible when that low effort impeachment trial pulled in 7 R votes, including one guy in a safely red district who just won his reelection changed his mind when he heard the defense.

His defense was head over heels trying to avoid talking about election fraud claims and the dems didn't see particularly interested in that either. They were asking specific questions about when Trump knew about the attack and what he was doing, they simply didn't answer them and they were content with leaving it at that. Nobody wants to know exactly why it took so long to get help? Who else knew the president was going to send a crowd down there to disrupt the proceedings and did they deliberately leave it unprotected, and for what reason?

You think I'm digging a hole because I think they should have tried to get answers to those questions. That's fine, I don't particularly like the take that since they were going to lose and it was delaying legislation that phoning it in was OK. But, that's what they did.

This isn't a productive conversation for me anymore so I have nothing further to add.

The bottom line is getting a conviction would have been an very difficult uphill struggle. The fact that a few days earlier 45 republicans voted that the trial was unconstitutional on utterly specious, easily shown, grounds shows just how difficult it would be. The fact Mitch, do not forget Republican House leader in the Senate, voted to acquit, even though he admits Trump was guilty, on those specious grounds indicates just how difficult it would be. The fact Mitch was at least partly responsible for those specious grounds is disgusting.

It is obvious to me that virtually any specious excuse would be used by most of the Republicans to avoid conviction. The fact that they acquitted even though the Defence was incredibly bad and specious, and that the Prosecution had presented a virtually irrefutable case, has admitted by Mitch, shows just how difficult it would be.

The fact that 7 Republican Senator's voted to convict doesn't show that better arguments to convict would have worked, given that 5 were already before the trial almost certain to convict without the trial. So they didn't need much convincing. At best two changed their minds.

As for the rest. The simple fact, that it appears that most took refugee, in the specious argument that it was unconstitutional to have the trial with Trump no longer in office, shows just how willing they were to grasp at any absurd straw to excuse their cowardice.

The GOP became Trump's bi#$% years ago and now we have full collaboration of that.

Skeptic Ginger · 16th February 2021, 10:44 PM

Originally Posted by dirtywick

That's the whole point. This was a really good chance for the dems to get the GOP senators out of his ass, evidence by the fact several of them did get out of his ass, including one after hearing the defense arguments. ....

You are blaming the wrong people.

Aridas · 16th February 2021, 11:15 PM

Originally Posted by Vixen

It has been known for concussed individuals to not realise how serious their condition is straightaway.

Getting hit on the head can kill a person in a couple different ways without them actually feeling anything amiss until hours later when it's too late or not even feeling it then, if I understand the situation correctly. Of some small note, the Detective Conan anime actually ran a story that dealt with a case of that happening rather recently.

Bubba · 16th February 2021, 11:48 PM

Originally Posted by Vixen

It has been known for concussed individuals to not realise how serious their condition is straightaway.

You and the "Impeachment Managers" apparently did not know...

Even CNN admits...

( Only took forever. Damage done. After the narrative has been spun, the truth comes out.)

( fake news destroys nation )

Quote:

https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/02/polit...ges/index.html

According to one law enforcement official, medical examiners did not find signs that the officer sustained any blunt force trauma, so investigators believe that early reports that he was fatally struck by a fire extinguisher are not true.

Quote:

....no evidence Capitol Police Officer Brian Sicknick died from blunt force to the head ...medical examiners did not find signs that the officer sustained any blunt force trauma,

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/202...d-january-6th/

Stacyhs · 17th February 2021, 01:10 AM

Originally Posted by Bubba

You and the "Impeachment Managers" apparently did not know...

Even CNN admits...

( Only took forever. Damage done. After the narrative has been spun, the truth comes out.)

( fake news destroys nation )

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/202...d-january-6th/

Neither the autopsy results nor the cause of death has been released. All we know is that he allegedly told his brother later that day that he been sprayed with bear repellent a couple times (which is unlikely to be the cause of death) and that he collapsed at the station. He was on life support at the hospital after a brain clot caused a stroke. Whether or not the clot and resulting stroke were a result of an injury received during the riot or a pre-existing medical condition is not known.

As for Bubba's "fake news destroys nations" nonsense, this from FOX News:

Quote:

Media reports have been conflicting — unnamed law enforcement sources initially told outlets Sicknick was bludgeoned in the head by a fire extinguisher, while others speaking on condition of anonymity countered those claims, arguing there was no immediate evidence showing that Sicknick suffered any blunt force trauma.

Aridas · 17th February 2021, 01:27 AM

It's rather interesting when Republican leaders outright tell us that they don't like people doing the right thing.

Quote:

The chair of the Washington County, Pa., Republican Party blasted Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.) on Monday for voting to convict former President Trump in his second impeachment trial, saying the outgoing senator was not elected to “do the right thing.”

“We did not send him there to vote his conscience. We did not send him there to do the right thing or whatever he said he was doing. We sent him there to represent us,” Washington County GOP Chairman Dave Ball told Pittsburgh-area CBS affiliate KDKA-TV.

That group of Republicans censured Toomey, of course.

Stacyhs · 17th February 2021, 01:50 AM

Originally Posted by Aridas

It's rather interesting when Republican leaders outright tell us that they don't like people doing the right thing.

That group of Republicans censured Toomey, of course.

Every once in a while the truth slips out. The catch themselves quickly, though.

Vixen · 17th February 2021, 04:21 AM

Originally Posted by Segnosaur

And, the republican infighting has begun...

From: CBC (Canuck broadcasting corporation)
Former U.S. president Donald Trump lashed out at Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell on Tuesday, signalling a growing feud between the two most important voices in the Republican Party. "Mitch is a dour, sullen and unsmiling political hack, and if Republican Senators are going to stay with him, they will not win again," Trump said in a statement released through his political action committee amid the fallout over his second impeachment trial.

So despite the fact that Moscow Mitch provided cover for Trump over 4 years, and voted not to impeach him (twice), Trump attacked him. Hopefully re-enforcing the lesson to all of Trump's boot-lickers... any "loyalty" from trump only works when you are completely subservient.

Mitch and the Republicians were given the perfect opportunity to blow out Trump once and for all and they failed to seize it.

No clairvoyant is needed to predict Trump would be stirring up chaos once again. Not to mention the racist jab at Mitch's wife.

Vixen · 17th February 2021, 04:23 AM

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

No kidding. Have we ever seen Trump use the words dour and sullen? It's laughable.

'Dour' is a Scottish word so Trump might have picked this up from his Scottish mother.

Captain_Swoop · 17th February 2021, 04:39 AM

Originally Posted by Segnosaur

So despite the fact that Moscow Mitch provided cover for Trump over 4 years, and voted not to impeach him (twice), Trump attacked him. Hopefully re-enforcing the lesson to all of Trump's boot-lickers... any "loyalty" from trump only works when you are ~~completely subservient~~useful.

Fixed that for you

thaiboxerken · 17th February 2021, 07:44 AM

Originally Posted by Bubba

You and the "Impeachment Managers" apparently did not know...

Even CNN admits...

( Only took forever. Damage done. After the narrative has been spun, the truth comes out.)

( fake news destroys nation )

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/202...d-january-6th/

What's the damage done?

MRC_Hans · 17th February 2021, 08:17 AM

Originally Posted by Vixen

Mitch and the Republicians were given the perfect opportunity to blow out Trump once and for all and they failed to seize it.

No clairvoyant is needed to predict Trump would be stirring up chaos once again. Not to mention the racist jab at Mitch's wife.

Hate to be controversial (OK, I tell a lie; I don't), but just maybe what Mitch did was not so stupid. Presumably emotions are still running high in the T**** base. A "guilty" verdict might cause riots. On the other hand he unequivocally denounced T****´s actions. He didn't throw him under the bus, but he may have thrown him on one, going out of town.

Once the noise has died down, and people notice that their county actually isn't destroyed, and their guns aren't confiscated, some will remember the bad things done. The people sent to riot, then abandoned to be prosecuted. All the Covid deaths, etc.

And the GOP can silently restructure, congress critters can slowly begin to remember they were against T**** all the time. And Donald himself will be bogged down in legislation, dwindling finances, unable to play for the crowds.

Perhaps something good can come of this.

Hans

Fast Eddie B · 17th February 2021, 08:34 AM

Originally Posted by MRC_Hans

Once the noise has died down, and people notice that their county actually isn't destroyed, and their guns aren't confiscated...

Not sure about the latter point.

8 years of Obama NOT confiscating guns did little to tamp down the fears of the gun rights folks. Don’t see why that fear will not survive 4 or 8 years of Democratic rule.

Especially if they DO start confiscating guns!

Segnosaur · 17th February 2021, 08:41 AM

Originally Posted by MRC_Hans

Hate to be controversial (OK, I tell a lie; I don't), but just maybe what Mitch did was not so stupid. Presumably emotions are still running high in the T**** base. A "guilty" verdict might cause riots. On the other hand he unequivocally denounced T****´s actions. He didn't throw him under the bus, but he may have thrown him on one, going out of town.

How?

Moscow Mitch has no power in this. He can't 'help' get Trump convicted criminally. He can call for criminal conviction all he wants, but it is irrelevant. The "mixed message" of "republican senators won't convict... but hopefully someone else can" will be of no use.

Quote:

Once the noise has died down, and people notice that their county actually isn't destroyed, and their guns aren't confiscated, some will remember the bad things done. The people sent to riot, then abandoned to be prosecuted. All the Covid deaths, etc.

The U.S. did pretty good under Obama.... no confiscated guns, no shiara law, etc. Yet it didn't keep Trump elected in 2016.

People can be short sighted. They can get fixated on small things and ignore "bigger pictures". Biden could invent a cure for cancer and the common cold, fix the deficit, and provide health care for everyone for free, and there would still be people who think "OMG the democrats are the devil!"

Quote:

And the GOP can silently restructure, congress critters can slowly begin to remember they were against T**** all the time.

That.... is not a good thing.

Those congress critters went all-in for Trump. Allowing them to change history by claiming "oh I really was anti-Trump" allows them to absolve themselves of their responsibility, and will allow them to do the same thing in the future. They are sending the message... "justice doesn't matter... only our political power".

Quote:

And Donald himself will be bogged down in legislation, dwindling finances, unable to play for the crowds.

The problem is, republican actions in voting against impeachment are going to delay Trump's problems. By not impeaching him (and banning him from political office in the future), they allow him a lifeline... he can scam funds from the foolish (in the guise of "funding a political run") which will find its way into his personal bank account, he can start holding rallies (because he's still theoretically a viable candidate). And now, any attempt to charge him for anything (tax fraud, Georgia election interference, etc.) can get spun into "Political attack!"

Stacyhs · 17th February 2021, 11:08 AM

Originally Posted by Segnosaur

The U.S. did pretty good under Obama.... no confiscated guns, no shiara law, etc. Yet it didn't keep Trump elected in 2016.

People can be short sighted. They can get fixated on small things and ignore "bigger pictures". Biden could invent a cure for cancer and the common cold, fix the deficit, and provide health care for everyone for free, and there would still be people who think "OMG the democrats are the devil!"

Agreed. People's fears are often unfounded on facts but that doesn't stop them from having them and, thus, politicians from playing on them. That is what Trump does/did so well. Contrary to the economy doing well, guns not being confiscated and no sharia law under eight years of Obama, Trump was able to play on people's fears that those and a host of other horrible things would still happen under Clinton. Fear mongering is the bread and butter of the right wing and most especially of Trumpism. All you have to do is listen to right wing pundits to understand that. I've long said that Fear is the basis of conservatism.

acbytesla · 17th February 2021, 12:46 PM

Originally Posted by Segnosaur

The U.S. did pretty good under Obama.... no confiscated guns, no shiara law, etc. Yet it didn't keep Trump elected in 2016.

People can be short sighted. They can get fixated on small things and ignore "bigger pictures". Biden could invent a cure for cancer and the common cold, fix the deficit, and provide health care for everyone for free, and there would still be people who think "OMG the democrats are the devil!"

That.... is not a good thing.

I read an article a few days about a woman getting sucked into the Q-anon nonsense.
She was convinced that Trump would win. Then she was sure the election was fraudulent. That Biden wasn't going to be inaugurated. That if Biden was inaugurated, the US would immediately become a communist country. Not that he was going to be inaugurated.
Trump was God's President. The Democrats and Hollywood were part of a pedophile conspiracy and would be rounded up and arrested starting on January 6th.

After, the riot. (She wasn't involved) She was all prepared to take her child out of school and go into hiding. Her mother talked her out of it. Then when the world didn't collapse she came to the conclusion that everything she was told was false.

What troubles me was how easily she believed all the wild conspiracy theories. She admitted that she didn't read a lot and should have known better. This is the biggest problem facing the country. People aren't skeptical. They lack the skills to filter out the disinformation.

16th February 2021, 12:24 AM	#2802
Segnosaur Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Canada, eh? Posts: 17,369	Originally Posted by dirtywick Yes I do think it would have mattered, his lawyers were completely outclassed and unprepared. Their opening remarks flipped one Senator alone. As another poster asked... do you really think that any republican senator would have changed their vote based on the evidence? If so, I have a bridge to sell you. Seriously, they could have a video recording of Trump talking to Putin about how he hoped more police officers would have been killed in is plans to install a dictatorship, and the majority of republican senators would still vote to acquit. Quote: Maybe they'd want to hear from Mark Meadows and Raffensperger on the GA call? Recordings of the call have already been made public. I doubt any senator was unaware of their contents. Quote: Want to see Trump's phone records from Jan 6? Who else did he call that we don't know about? Senators already had enough information to convict Trump on the facts. While that sort of information should be revealed, it would not have been required to illustrate Trump was guilty. We already had more than enough evidence of that. Quote: What did Trump and Pence talk about after the riot? Was the pentagon told to deliberately scale down the national guard presence and response? On who's orders? They could have asked this stuff and figured out what happened. All that stuff should be revealed. And the proper forum to do that is a full inquiry (either by the senators themselves, or by something like the Mueller report). A proper accounting of events will probably take months... more time than is practical during an impeachment trial. (And not only that, such a long, drawn-out trial would likely make the proceedings lose its impact with the voting public.)
	__________________ Trust me, I know what I'm doing. - Sledgehammer I'm Mary Poppin's Y'all! - Yondu We are Groot - Groot

16th February 2021, 03:16 AM	#2803
PhantomWolf Penultimate Amazing FLA February 2021 Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 20,404	Originally Posted by dirtywick fine, the charges weren't even in the same league and Clinton was popular, Trump was unpopular and used the office of the president to try and kill people. And both times we had Republicans that, except for a handful, were more interested in toeing the party line and keeping their jobs than in determining if the President's actions were a threat to the office. That is why out of 55, 50 Republicans voted to find Clinton guilty, and why 43 of 50 voted to acquit Trump. Clinton was popular among Democrats and unpopular with Republicans. Likewise, Trump was unpopular with Democrats, but extremely popular still among Republicans. See how that works? Republican Senators vote with whether their base liked the President or not, not were what he did was impeachable or not. Because it's all about keeping their jobs. If you think that anything was going to change it more than it did, you are seriously living in a land of delusion. Quote: I mean, if you think they did a good job that's cool. They had the power to do a proper impeachment this time and didn't really do anything with it. If they were just going to give a couple of speeches and show a video and not really try and change anyone's mind they could have censured him. Ahh, bless your heart, you really believe that the sniveling cowards that are Republican Senators would really change their minds and get themselves primaried by the rabid Trumpers and nonsensical QAnons just because more people got up and said "He did it!" How special, and naive. The craven Republicans know what Trump did, even the suck-ups like Senator "Perhaps my father was involved in the Kennedy assassination" Cruz, and Senator "Let me help with that Insurrection" Hawley know that Trump's guilt is so far beyond a reasonable doubt that it can almost see Russia from its doorstep. They don't care that he's guilty, all they care about is appeasing the mob that is Trumpers and QAnon and so not losing their jobs next primary season. No amount of witness testimony will change that. Heck, they were there, they were the targets of the mob. Trump set that mob on them, and they don't care because it's not politically convenient to care. And if you aren't willing to understand this, then you are deluding yourself, so stop blaming that delusion on the Democrats.
	__________________ It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. -- JayUtah I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. -- Charles Babbage (1791-1871) Last edited by PhantomWolf; 16th February 2021 at 03:18 AM.

16th February 2021, 05:32 AM	#2804
dirtywick Illuminator Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 3,362	Originally Posted by Stacyhs This wasn't about Trump's guilt or innocence for the GOP. That was obvious with their fixation on the "constitutionality" excuse. It was about finding an excuse to NOT find him guilty. You are living in La La Land if you think ANTHING the House Managers could have brought in would have changed ten more GOP votes. Bill Cassidy changed his vote after the opening remarks. You guys are ignoring that, but I'm in La La Land, I'm special, I'm naive, I'll buy a bridge? They never would have flipped their votes? One of them did. Whatever, you guys are out of line.
dirtywick Illuminator Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 3,362

16th February 2021, 11:30 AM	#2806
Meadmaker Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 25,559	Originally Posted by turingtest Those reactionaries aren't declaring war just against Democrats who might think it's worthwhile trying to meet them halfway, they're declaring war against members of their own party who won't toe their line (Politico via MSN): The "big tent" GOP doesn't even have room in their own party for diversity of opinion; just more evidence that the folks who mouth "unity!" at anyone outside of it isn't talking about unity at all, they're demanding nothing less than unconditional surrender. These "censure" votes are really scary to me. Ok maybe that's an exaggeration, but they definitely make me nervous. Is there precedent for this sort of thing? I've never heard of it. I know that they are just symbolic votes, but the idea of taking a formal vote to criticize an elected representative for voting the wrong way just gives me the creeps. It just has a huge authoritarian vibe to it, more than just voting someone out of a primary would have.
	__________________ Yes, yes. I know you are right. But would it hurt you to provide some information?

16th February 2021, 12:13 PM	#2807
alfaniner Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Sorth Dakonsin Posts: 25,074	Originally Posted by Meadmaker These "censure" votes are really scary to me. Ok maybe that's an exaggeration, but they definitely make me nervous. Is there precedent for this sort of thing? I've never heard of it. I know that they are just symbolic votes, but the idea of taking a formal vote to criticize an elected representative for voting the wrong way just gives me the creeps. It just has a huge authoritarian vibe to it, more than just voting someone out of a primary would have. Both the censure and the impeachment dams have been broken. While they were rarely invoked before, now it's going to be happening all the time, for the slightest (and even nonexistent) offenses.
	__________________ Science is self-correcting. Woo is self-contradicting.

16th February 2021, 12:13 AM	#2801
Skeptic Ginger Nasty Woman Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 87,994	Originally Posted by dirtywick Yes I do think it would have mattered, his lawyers were completely outclassed and unprepared. Their opening remarks flipped one Senator alone. Maybe they'd want to hear from Mark Meadows and Raffensperger on the GA call? Want to see Trump's phone records from Jan 6? Who else did he call that we don't know about? What did Trump and Pence talk about after the riot? Was the pentagon told to deliberately scale down the national guard presence and response? On who's orders? They could have asked this stuff and figured out what happened. Do you honestly think those GOP Senators weren't convinced Trump was guilty? As for who ordered what, you won't find Trump's fingerprints on any smoking gun. That's going to come out with the investigation. Trump's like a mob boss that keeps his orders one step removed.

16th February 2021, 11:24 AM	#2805
Pacal Graduate Poster Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Toronto Posts: 1,184	Originally Posted by dirtywick Bill Cassidy changed his vote after the opening remarks. You guys are ignoring that, but I'm in La La Land, I'm special, I'm naive, I'll buy a bridge? They never would have flipped their votes? One of them did. Whatever, you guys are out of line. The chances of convicting Trump were minimal because of the lack of backbone by most Republicans. Remember Mitch afterwards said Trump was guilty but it was unconstitutional to hold an Impeachment Trial with Trump no longer in office. Which is A) pathetic and B) false and easily demonstrated to be so. And of course Mitch was the main reason the trial was held after Trump was in office. Of course Mitch damn well knows the actual law but was looking for and setting up an excuse to not convict Trump. In this he was joined by it appears most of the Republican Senators. The absolutely disgusting boot licking behavior of Graham is of course remarkable in it shows that a man without a spine can walk. Was it impossible to convince enough Republican Senators? Of course not. Utterly improbable events do happen like being struck by a meteor or winning the lottery twice!! Getting enough Republicans to join in convicting Trump was on the same order of very low probability to winning the lottery twice etc! It was and remains obvious to me that the great majority of Republican Senators like Mitch and Graham would have seized virtually any excuse to acquit just like how Mitch did. And the fact that previously 45 Republican Senators tried to stop the trial on the grounds it was unconstitutional, a completely bogus and easily shown to be so excuse, shows just how much Republican Senators have become beholden to the GOP - now Trump's party. In the end it appears two Republicans minds seemed to have changed, (Personal integrity at last!), but getting anymore? a desperate uphill struggle against submission to the Orange one and perceived political self interest. So yeah I think you are a bit naive about the whole thing.

16th February 2021, 12:29 PM	#2808
Skeptic Ginger Nasty Woman Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 87,994	Originally Posted by dirtywick Bill Cassidy changed his vote after the opening remarks. You guys are ignoring that, but I'm in La La Land, I'm special, I'm naive, I'll buy a bridge? They never would have flipped their votes? One of them did. Whatever, you guys are out of line. Whoopteedo, one guy from a swing state changed his vote.

16th February 2021, 02:27 PM	#2809
Stacyhs Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2016 Location: United States Posts: 18,246	Originally Posted by dirtywick Bill Cassidy changed his vote after the opening remarks. You guys are ignoring that, but I'm in La La Land, I'm special, I'm naive, I'll buy a bridge? They never would have flipped their votes? One of them did. Whatever, you guys are out of line. ONE. Let's repeat that: ONE. Out of 44. So, yes. You're in La La Land, naive, and don't let a bridge salesman anywhere near you unless you want to be the proud owner of one.

16th February 2021, 02:43 PM	#2810
Vixen Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Apr 2015 Posts: 21,656	Originally Posted by Bubba Imagine if Officer Sicknick texted his brother, after the Jan 6 riot: "I got pepper sprayed a couple times, but I'm in good shape." https://www.nationalreview.com/2021/...yFiE4eOhH-6s_E It has been known for concussed individuals to not realise how serious their condition is straightaway.
	__________________ Blott en dag, ett ögonblick i sänder, vilken tröst, vad än som kommer på!

16th February 2021, 03:05 PM	#2811
dirtywick Illuminator Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 3,362	Originally Posted by Stacyhs ONE. Let's repeat that: ONE. Out of 44. So, yes. You're in La La Land, naive, and don't let a bridge salesman anywhere near you unless you want to be the proud owner of one. But I thought R were never going to change their minds? Now it’s big deal one did? Maybe with some proper investigation and evidence it could have been more. There’s evidence it’s possible because it happened right in front of you. Who can say, they didn’t try. like I said earlier I don’t mind if anyone thinks they did a good job with the impeachment. no need to be a jerk about it Skeptic Ginger, Bill Cassidy is a senator from LA. Is that a swing state
dirtywick Illuminator Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 3,362

16th February 2021, 03:10 PM	#2812
dirtywick Illuminator Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 3,362	Originally Posted by Pacal The chances of convicting Trump were minimal because of the lack of backbone by most Republicans. Remember Mitch afterwards said Trump was guilty but it was unconstitutional to hold an Impeachment Trial with Trump no longer in office. Which is A) pathetic and B) false and easily demonstrated to be so. And of course Mitch was the main reason the trial was held after Trump was in office. Of course Mitch damn well knows the actual law but was looking for and setting up an excuse to not convict Trump. In this he was joined by it appears most of the Republican Senators. The absolutely disgusting boot licking behavior of Graham is of course remarkable in it shows that a man without a spine can walk. Was it impossible to convince enough Republican Senators? Of course not. Utterly improbable events do happen like being struck by a meteor or winning the lottery twice!! Getting enough Republicans to join in convicting Trump was on the same order of very low probability to winning the lottery twice etc! It was and remains obvious to me that the great majority of Republican Senators like Mitch and Graham would have seized virtually any excuse to acquit just like how Mitch did. And the fact that previously 45 Republican Senators tried to stop the trial on the grounds it was unconstitutional, a completely bogus and easily shown to be so excuse, shows just how much Republican Senators have become beholden to the GOP - now Trump's party. In the end it appears two Republicans minds seemed to have changed, (Personal integrity at last!), but getting anymore? a desperate uphill struggle against submission to the Orange one and perceived political self interest. So yeah I think you are a bit naive about the whole thing. Maybe. Perhaps several more would have changed in the face of greater evidence and public pressure. Would have been nice to find out.
dirtywick Illuminator Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 3,362

16th February 2021, 03:15 PM	#2813
Skeptic Ginger Nasty Woman Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 87,994	Originally Posted by dirtywick ... Skeptic Ginger, Bill Cassidy is a senator from LA. Is that a swing state Believe it or not, yes when it comes to Senators. Wiki They've had almost all Democratic Senators from 1876 until 2005. Cassidy's immediate predecessor was a Democrat, Mary Landrieu.

16th February 2021, 03:28 PM	#2814
acbytesla Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Dec 2012 Posts: 28,597	Originally Posted by Vixen It has been known for concussed individuals to not realise how serious their condition is straightaway. I got knocked out cold playing football in high school. After they gave me smelling salts to wake me up I begged to get back on the field. Thank ~~God~~ science that the coaches wouldn't let me. Later after the game I began to vomit and passed out again. I was in the ICU for 3 days.
	__________________ Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get to me. .

16th February 2021, 03:36 PM	#2815
Segnosaur Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Canada, eh? Posts: 17,369	Originally Posted by dirtywick But I thought R were never going to change their minds? Now it’s big deal one did? Maybe with some proper investigation and evidence it could have been more. There’s evidence it’s possible because it happened right in front of you. Who can say, they didn’t try. First of all, that's one senator... it took 4 days of trial to convince him to vote to convict. At that rate it would take another month and a half to convince the other 10 or so republicans. It should also be pointed out that while other posters were wrong about Cassidy being from a swing state, he himself used to be a democrat. (I am sure his current allegiences are to the GOP, but it does mean he might not be as "hard core" as long-term repubilcans.) And he also regularly voted against Trump in congress. (he did not support overturning the votes in Arizona/Penn, he voted to restrict Trump from taking military action in Iran without congressional approval, and voted to keep troops in Afghanistan/Syria.) So Cassidy voting against Trump is not THAT surprising. Lastly... keep in mind that he did not technically "switch" his vote... the 2 votes were for different things... was the impeachment constitutional, and was Trump guilty. Yes, most senators would have probably considered them close to "the same", but if someone had some integrity in accepting the results of the first vote, its possible that the second vote will go from a no to a yes.
	__________________ Trust me, I know what I'm doing. - Sledgehammer I'm Mary Poppin's Y'all! - Yondu We are Groot - Groot

16th February 2021, 03:37 PM	#2816
Segnosaur Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Canada, eh? Posts: 17,369	Originally Posted by dirtywick Maybe. Perhaps several more would have changed in the face of greater evidence and public pressure. Would have been nice to find out. Yes, because the American public NEVER loses interest in anything, regardless of how long it goes on. (sarcasm intended)
	__________________ Trust me, I know what I'm doing. - Sledgehammer I'm Mary Poppin's Y'all! - Yondu We are Groot - Groot

16th February 2021, 07:19 PM	#2817
Segnosaur Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Canada, eh? Posts: 17,369	And, the republican infighting has begun... From: CBC (Canuck broadcasting corporation) Former U.S. president Donald Trump lashed out at Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell on Tuesday, signalling a growing feud between the two most important voices in the Republican Party. "Mitch is a dour, sullen and unsmiling political hack, and if Republican Senators are going to stay with him, they will not win again," Trump said in a statement released through his political action committee amid the fallout over his second impeachment trial. So despite the fact that Moscow Mitch provided cover for Trump over 4 years, and voted not to impeach him (twice), Trump attacked him. Hopefully re-enforcing the lesson to all of Trump's boot-lickers... any "loyalty" from trump only works when you are completely subservient.
	__________________ Trust me, I know what I'm doing. - Sledgehammer I'm Mary Poppin's Y'all! - Yondu We are Groot - Groot

16th February 2021, 07:54 PM	#2818
Stacyhs Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2016 Location: United States Posts: 18,246	Originally Posted by dirtywick But I thought R were never going to change their minds? Now it’s big deal one did? Maybe with some proper investigation and evidence it could have been more. There’s evidence it’s possible because it happened right in front of you. Who can say, they didn’t try. like I said earlier I don’t mind if anyone thinks they did a good job with the impeachment. no need to be a jerk about it Skeptic Ginger, Bill Cassidy is a senator from LA. Is that a swing state No, YOU are making it a big deal that ONE did. I agree, no need to be a jerk about it. So stop digging the hole any deeper. It's been obvious from the beginning that this impeachment, just like the first one, was going nowhere because the current GOP is the PARTY OF TRUMP and as long as the GOP senators are up his ass, it will continue to be.

16th February 2021, 08:17 PM	#2819
Minoosh Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jul 2011 Posts: 12,342	Originally Posted by Segnosaur And, the republican infighting has begun... From: CBC (Canuck broadcasting corporation) Former U.S. president Donald Trump lashed out at Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell on Tuesday, signalling a growing feud between the two most important voices in the Republican Party. "Mitch is a dour, sullen and unsmiling political hack, and if Republican Senators are going to stay with him, they will not win again," Trump said in a statement released through his political action committee amid the fallout over his second impeachment trial. Trump didn't write that! It's rewarding seeing his words muffled by his own PAC. His original statement would have closer to "Mitch is a LOSER and anyone pathetic enough to support him will be a LOSER in 2022. Sad!"

16th February 2021, 08:58 PM	#2820
Skeptic Ginger Nasty Woman Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 87,994	Originally Posted by Minoosh Trump didn't write that! It's rewarding seeing his words muffled by his own PAC. His original statement would have closer to "Mitch is a LOSER and anyone pathetic enough to support him will be a LOSER in 2022. Sad!" No kidding. Have we ever seen Trump use the words dour and sullen? It's laughable.

16th February 2021, 09:02 PM	#2821
Norman Alexander Philosopher Join Date: Nov 2014 Location: Gundungurra Posts: 9,218	Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger No kidding. Have we ever seen Trump use the words dour and sullen? It's laughable. He's most likely heard those words addressed to him. Perhaps he thinks they are "good" words.
	__________________ _{...our governments are just trying to protect us from terror. In the same way that someone banging a hornets’ nest with a stick is trying to protect us from hornets. Frankie Boyle, Guardian, July 2015}

16th February 2021, 09:40 PM	#2822
dirtywick Illuminator Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 3,362	Originally Posted by Stacyhs No, YOU are making it a big deal that ONE did. I agree, no need to be a jerk about it. So stop digging the hole any deeper. It's been obvious from the beginning that this impeachment, just like the first one, was going nowhere because the current GOP is the PARTY OF TRUMP and as long as the GOP senators are up his ass, it will continue to be. That's the whole point. This was a really good chance for the dems to get the GOP senators out of his ass, evidence by the fact several of them did get out of his ass, including one after hearing the defense arguments. You guys are so convinced that it's impossible when that low effort impeachment trial pulled in 7 R votes, including one guy in a safely red district who just won his reelection changed his mind when he heard the defense. His defense was head over heels trying to avoid talking about election fraud claims and the dems didn't see particularly interested in that either. They were asking specific questions about when Trump knew about the attack and what he was doing, they simply didn't answer them and they were content with leaving it at that. Nobody wants to know exactly why it took so long to get help? Who else knew the president was going to send a crowd down there to disrupt the proceedings and did they deliberately leave it unprotected, and for what reason? You think I'm digging a hole because I think they should have tried to get answers to those questions. That's fine, I don't particularly like the take that since they were going to lose and it was delaying legislation that phoning it in was OK. But, that's what they did. This isn't a productive conversation for me anymore so I have nothing further to add.
dirtywick Illuminator Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 3,362

16th February 2021, 09:53 PM	#2823
The Great Zaganza Maledictorian Join Date: Aug 2016 Posts: 14,885	For the GOP Donor Class, it should be easy to choose between the guy who was just reelected for 6 years and the guy who was not.
	__________________ The things that you're liable To read in the Bible It ain't necessarily so

16th February 2021, 10:00 PM	#2824
Beelzebuddy Philosopher Join Date: Jun 2010 Posts: 8,104	Originally Posted by dirtywick That's the whole point. This was a really good chance for the dems to get the GOP senators out of his ass, evidence by the fact several of them did get out of his ass, including one after hearing the defense arguments. You guys are so convinced that it's impossible when that low effort impeachment trial pulled in 7 R votes, including one guy in a safely red district who just won his reelection changed his mind when he heard the defense. If the GOP hadn't been spending years perfecting the Lucy Football approach to bipartisanship, you might have had a point. They're willing to seem reasonable only when it doesn't make any difference in the outcome. If the impeachment vote was a simple majority, not a one of them would have turned coat.
Beelzebuddy Philosopher Join Date: Jun 2010 Posts: 8,104

16th February 2021, 10:28 PM	#2825
Pacal Graduate Poster Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Toronto Posts: 1,184	Originally Posted by dirtywick That's the whole point. This was a really good chance for the dems to get the GOP senators out of his ass, evidence by the fact several of them did get out of his ass, including one after hearing the defense arguments. You guys are so convinced that it's impossible when that low effort impeachment trial pulled in 7 R votes, including one guy in a safely red district who just won his reelection changed his mind when he heard the defense. His defense was head over heels trying to avoid talking about election fraud claims and the dems didn't see particularly interested in that either. They were asking specific questions about when Trump knew about the attack and what he was doing, they simply didn't answer them and they were content with leaving it at that. Nobody wants to know exactly why it took so long to get help? Who else knew the president was going to send a crowd down there to disrupt the proceedings and did they deliberately leave it unprotected, and for what reason? You think I'm digging a hole because I think they should have tried to get answers to those questions. That's fine, I don't particularly like the take that since they were going to lose and it was delaying legislation that phoning it in was OK. But, that's what they did. This isn't a productive conversation for me anymore so I have nothing further to add. The bottom line is getting a conviction would have been an very difficult uphill struggle. The fact that a few days earlier 45 republicans voted that the trial was unconstitutional on utterly specious, easily shown, grounds shows just how difficult it would be. The fact Mitch, do not forget Republican House leader in the Senate, voted to acquit, even though he admits Trump was guilty, on those specious grounds indicates just how difficult it would be. The fact Mitch was at least partly responsible for those specious grounds is disgusting. It is obvious to me that virtually any specious excuse would be used by most of the Republicans to avoid conviction. The fact that they acquitted even though the Defence was incredibly bad and specious, and that the Prosecution had presented a virtually irrefutable case, has admitted by Mitch, shows just how difficult it would be. The fact that 7 Republican Senator's voted to convict doesn't show that better arguments to convict would have worked, given that 5 were already before the trial almost certain to convict without the trial. So they didn't need much convincing. At best two changed their minds. As for the rest. The simple fact, that it appears that most took refugee, in the specious argument that it was unconstitutional to have the trial with Trump no longer in office, shows just how willing they were to grasp at any absurd straw to excuse their cowardice. The GOP became Trump's bi#$% years ago and now we have full collaboration of that.

16th February 2021, 10:44 PM	#2826
Skeptic Ginger Nasty Woman Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 87,994	Originally Posted by dirtywick That's the whole point. This was a really good chance for the dems to get the GOP senators out of his ass, evidence by the fact several of them did get out of his ass, including one after hearing the defense arguments. .... You are blaming the wrong people.

16th February 2021, 11:15 PM	#2827
Aridas Crazy Little Green Dragon Join Date: Sep 2011 Location: East Coast, US Posts: 7,605	Originally Posted by Vixen It has been known for concussed individuals to not realise how serious their condition is straightaway. Getting hit on the head can kill a person in a couple different ways without them actually feeling anything amiss until hours later when it's too late or not even feeling it then, if I understand the situation correctly. Of some small note, the Detective Conan anime actually ran a story that dealt with a case of that happening rather recently.
	__________________ So sayeth the crazy little dragon.

16th February 2021, 11:48 PM	#2828
Bubba Philosopher Join Date: Oct 2014 Posts: 5,269	Originally Posted by Vixen It has been known for concussed individuals to not realise how serious their condition is straightaway. You and the "Impeachment Managers" apparently did not know... Even CNN admits... ( Only took forever. Damage done. After the narrative has been spun, the truth comes out.) ( fake news destroys nation ) Quote: https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/02/polit...ges/index.html According to one law enforcement official, medical examiners did not find signs that the officer sustained any blunt force trauma, so investigators believe that early reports that he was fatally struck by a fire extinguisher are not true. Quote: ....no evidence Capitol Police Officer Brian Sicknick died from blunt force to the head ...medical examiners did not find signs that the officer sustained any blunt force trauma, https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/202...d-january-6th/
Bubba Philosopher Join Date: Oct 2014 Posts: 5,269	Last edited by Bubba; 16th February 2021 at 11:52 PM.

17th February 2021, 01:10 AM	#2829
Stacyhs Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2016 Location: United States Posts: 18,246	Originally Posted by Bubba You and the "Impeachment Managers" apparently did not know... Even CNN admits... ( Only took forever. Damage done. After the narrative has been spun, the truth comes out.) ( fake news destroys nation ) https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/202...d-january-6th/ Neither the autopsy results nor the cause of death has been released. All we know is that he allegedly told his brother later that day that he been sprayed with bear repellent a couple times (which is unlikely to be the cause of death) and that he collapsed at the station. He was on life support at the hospital after a brain clot caused a stroke. Whether or not the clot and resulting stroke were a result of an injury received during the riot or a pre-existing medical condition is not known. As for Bubba's "fake news destroys nations" nonsense, this from FOX News: Quote: Media reports have been conflicting — unnamed law enforcement sources initially told outlets Sicknick was bludgeoned in the head by a fire extinguisher, while others speaking on condition of anonymity countered those claims, arguing there was no immediate evidence showing that Sicknick suffered any blunt force trauma.

17th February 2021, 01:27 AM	#2830
Aridas Crazy Little Green Dragon Join Date: Sep 2011 Location: East Coast, US Posts: 7,605	It's rather interesting when Republican leaders outright tell us that they don't like people doing the right thing. Quote: The chair of the Washington County, Pa., Republican Party blasted Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.) on Monday for voting to convict former President Trump in his second impeachment trial, saying the outgoing senator was not elected to “do the right thing.” “We did not send him there to vote his conscience. We did not send him there to do the right thing or whatever he said he was doing. We sent him there to represent us,” Washington County GOP Chairman Dave Ball told Pittsburgh-area CBS affiliate KDKA-TV. That group of Republicans censured Toomey, of course.
	__________________ So sayeth the crazy little dragon. Last edited by Aridas; 17th February 2021 at 01:28 AM.

17th February 2021, 01:50 AM	#2831
Stacyhs Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2016 Location: United States Posts: 18,246	Originally Posted by Aridas It's rather interesting when Republican leaders outright tell us that they don't like people doing the right thing. That group of Republicans censured Toomey, of course. Every once in a while the truth slips out. The catch themselves quickly, though.

17th February 2021, 04:21 AM	#2832
Vixen Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Apr 2015 Posts: 21,656	Originally Posted by Segnosaur And, the republican infighting has begun... From: CBC (Canuck broadcasting corporation) Former U.S. president Donald Trump lashed out at Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell on Tuesday, signalling a growing feud between the two most important voices in the Republican Party. "Mitch is a dour, sullen and unsmiling political hack, and if Republican Senators are going to stay with him, they will not win again," Trump said in a statement released through his political action committee amid the fallout over his second impeachment trial. So despite the fact that Moscow Mitch provided cover for Trump over 4 years, and voted not to impeach him (twice), Trump attacked him. Hopefully re-enforcing the lesson to all of Trump's boot-lickers... any "loyalty" from trump only works when you are completely subservient. Mitch and the Republicians were given the perfect opportunity to blow out Trump once and for all and they failed to seize it. No clairvoyant is needed to predict Trump would be stirring up chaos once again. Not to mention the racist jab at Mitch's wife.
	__________________ Blott en dag, ett ögonblick i sänder, vilken tröst, vad än som kommer på!

17th February 2021, 04:23 AM	#2833
Vixen Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Apr 2015 Posts: 21,656	Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger No kidding. Have we ever seen Trump use the words dour and sullen? It's laughable. 'Dour' is a Scottish word so Trump might have picked this up from his Scottish mother.
	__________________ Blott en dag, ett ögonblick i sänder, vilken tröst, vad än som kommer på!

17th February 2021, 04:39 AM	#2834
Captain_Swoop Penultimate Amazing Pither 12/20 Join Date: Jun 2010 Posts: 32,831	Originally Posted by Segnosaur So despite the fact that Moscow Mitch provided cover for Trump over 4 years, and voted not to impeach him (twice), Trump attacked him. Hopefully re-enforcing the lesson to all of Trump's boot-lickers... any "loyalty" from trump only works when you are ~~completely subservient~~useful. Fixed that for you

17th February 2021, 07:44 AM	#2835
thaiboxerken Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Sep 2001 Posts: 31,717	Originally Posted by Bubba You and the "Impeachment Managers" apparently did not know... Even CNN admits... ( Only took forever. Damage done. After the narrative has been spun, the truth comes out.) ( fake news destroys nation ) https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/202...d-january-6th/ What's the damage done?
	__________________ 1. He'd never do that. 2. Okay but he's not currently doing it. 3. Okay but he's not currently technically doing it. 4. Okay but everyone does it. 5. He's doing it, we can't stop him, no point in complaining about it. 6. We all knew he was going to do it which... makes it okay somehow. 7. It's perfectly fine that's he's doing it.