ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags donald trump , impeachment , rudy giuliani , Trump controversies

Reply
Old 26th September 2019, 04:24 PM   #201
PhantomWolf
Penultimate Amazing
 
PhantomWolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 18,749
Originally Posted by Cainkane1 View Post
Trumps not going to be impeached. He has too much dirt on the people who want to impeach him. If he is impeached he will take most of the impeachers with him.
The last I heard there were 215 Democrats and 1 ex-Republican for Impeachment. They need 218 votes.
__________________

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)

PhantomWolf is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th September 2019, 04:53 PM   #202
Stacyhs
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 9,032
Could we include his fake tan as grounds for impeachment?
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th September 2019, 05:00 PM   #203
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 19,486
Originally Posted by Segnosaur View Post
He won the election. He has gotten some (but not all) of his policies enacted. But his victories have largely been accomplished through the efforts of others: election interference by Russians, complicity by the GOP. And his popularity is wallowing in the 40% range. When historians look back at his presidency, they will probably judge him to be among the worst to hold the office; not exactly a very good legacy to leave.
(emp. added)

Yeah, but they'll be too busy working to repay their student loans to publish their results.


Ok, but seriously. I agree. His support stays strong because the economy is strong. I think presidents get far too much credit and far too much blame for that, but it is what it is. If there's an economic downturn come next November, he's out.

What I was getting at though with my "he keeps winning" comment is really that his enemies constantly think this latest revelation/scandal/faux pas is going to be the one that does him in. It never is, and then people say that all those other people are just too stupid to realize how bad Trump is.

I wish people would consider an alternative, which is that people might not be concerned about the same things that they are, and it doesn't have anything, or at least not much, to do with being stupid. I wish that people might consider the possibility that they, not Trump, are the ones that are out of touch with what's really important. I don't like Trump and he's unfit to be president, in my opinion, but he is a fantastic marketer, and part of that is just understanding what people want. (The rest of it is lying to them in order to promise they'll get it, but Democrats can't even get that far, because they didn't get to the first step.)

But, since that's not really a popular message around here, do carry on.

Last edited by Meadmaker; 26th September 2019 at 05:03 PM.
Meadmaker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th September 2019, 05:02 PM   #204
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 45,623
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
I'm sure Trump thinks of them that way. Snitches need stitches.
Lots of ratting ahead.
Remember the final shot in "The Departed"?
__________________
Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty.

Robert Heinlein.
dudalb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th September 2019, 05:05 PM   #205
Stacyhs
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 9,032
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
(emp. added)

Yeah, but they'll be too busy working to repay their student loans to publish their results.


Ok, but seriously. I agree. His support stays strong because the economy is strong. I think presidents get far too much credit and far too much blame for that, but it is what it is. If there's an economic downturn come next November, he's out.

What I was getting at though with my "he keeps winning" comment is really that his enemies constantly think this latest revelation/scandal/faux pas is going to be the one that does him in. It never is, and then people say that all those other people are just too stupid to realize how bad Trump is.

I wish people would consider an alternative, which is that people might not be concerned about the same things that they are, and it doesn't have anything, or at least not much, to do with being stupid.

But, since that's not really a popular message around here, do carry on.
True. Many people don't give a damn if their president is a pathologically lying narcissist who tried to extort a foreign government to get dirt on his political rival and obstructed justice as long as they get theirs.
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th September 2019, 05:10 PM   #206
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 19,486
Originally Posted by Dr. Keith View Post
Just reminder that we are not limited to the very open concept of "high crimes and misdemeanors", the full quote is:



Bribery is a stand alone constitutional grounds for removal. Was his extortion attempt Bribery? I don't know. But wouldn't you love to have the next three months of FoxNews dedicated to the definition of bribery.
Here's my take. If you have to look at what happened and say that when he did this that fits the definition of this other thing, what you have is a nothingburger.

So, when he used the word "though" in a sentence, that clearly meant that there was a connection between this and that, and that means it was extortion, which is really bribery, which is impeachable and...……..where were we?

Nixon held out a long time against that sort of thing. Finally, though, he had to release a tape where he was saying, "What if we gave this guy a million dollars to not testify?" (Not a direct quote, but not a distortion of what was said, either.) At that point, his public support vanished, and his congressional support dried up at the same time.

Find a crime that The Donald has committed that you don't have to explain to ordinary people why it's a crime, and then you'll have something that can win.
Meadmaker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th September 2019, 05:13 PM   #207
Stacyhs
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 9,032
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
Here's my take. If you have to look at what happened and say that when he did this that fits the definition of this other thing, what you have is a nothingburger.

So, when he used the word "though" in a sentence, that clearly meant that there was a connection between this and that, and that means it was extortion, which is really bribery, which is impeachable and...……..where were we?

Nixon held out a long time against that sort of thing. Finally, though, he had to release a tape where he was saying, "What if we gave this guy a million dollars to not testify?" (Not a direct quote, but not a distortion of what was said, either.) At that point, his public support vanished, and his congressional support dried up at the same time.

Find a crime that The Donald has committed that you don't have to explain to ordinary people why it's a crime, and then you'll have something that can win.
I think most Americans can figure out that extortion is a crime. What matters is if they give a damn.
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th September 2019, 05:13 PM   #208
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 19,486
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
True. Many people don't give a damn if their president is a pathologically lying narcissist who tried to extort a foreign government to get dirt on his political rival and obstructed justice as long as they get theirs.
Well, yes. At least sort of.

And, well, there's some argument about whether "extort" is the right word, and whether "obstructed justice" really happened. Yes, I've read the Mueller Report. See the post after the one you quoted.
Meadmaker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th September 2019, 05:16 PM   #209
Stacyhs
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 9,032
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
Well, yes. At least sort of.

And, well, there's some argument about whether "extort" is the right word, and whether "obstructed justice" really happened. Yes, I've read the Mueller Report. See the post after the one you quoted.
No, "extort" is the right word and obstruction happened as detailed in the Mueller Report. Mueller was clear as to why he could not come right out and say Trump committed obstruction but he sure as hell was clear that Trump was not 'exonerated' as Barr and Trump claimed.
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th September 2019, 05:37 PM   #210
WilliamSeger
Philosopher
 
WilliamSeger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,021
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
But, since that's not really a popular message around here, do carry on.
Well, if it's any consolation, I think everyone here already knows the "conventional wisdom" version.
WilliamSeger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th September 2019, 07:03 PM   #211
kellyb
Penultimate Amazing
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 11,916
Here's what Zephyr Teachout says:
https://twitter.com/ZephyrTeachout/s...75849592643584
Quote:
Re: the argument for a "narrow" impeachment inquiry on Ukraine election interference request only because that weakens the country's security.

Trump taking substantial foreign cash from the Saudi government weakens the country's national security.

Impeach on #Emoluments
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts ~ Bertrand Russell
I am proud to say that Henry Kissinger is not my friend.
kellyb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th September 2019, 07:11 PM   #212
xjx388
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 7,317
Originally Posted by kellyb View Post
Here's what Zephyr Teachout says:
https://twitter.com/ZephyrTeachout/s...75849592643584


The problem with including things from the past is that when those things were revealed, the Dems didn’t move on impeachment. From a public perception perspective, I think it looks bad. Like, “why didn’t you impeach on emoluments/obstruction when you learned about it? Must be because you didn’t think there was enough evidence back then. Well, there’s not any better evidence now.” This whistleblower thing is new and hasn’t been hashed out to death. If they can make a good case for extortion/bribery/whatever, then it’s the strongest play they currently have and it’s fresh enough to make an impact without the “witch hunt” baggage.
__________________
Hello.
xjx388 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th September 2019, 07:21 PM   #213
PhantomWolf
Penultimate Amazing
 
PhantomWolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 18,749
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
The problem with including things from the past is that when those things were revealed, the Dems didn’t move on impeachment. From a public perception perspective, I think it looks bad. Like, “why didn’t you impeach on emoluments/obstruction when you learned about it? Must be because you didn’t think there was enough evidence back then. Well, there’s not any better evidence now.” This whistleblower thing is new and hasn’t been hashed out to death. If they can make a good case for extortion/bribery/whatever, then it’s the strongest play they currently have and it’s fresh enough to make an impact without the “witch hunt” baggage.
The main answer to that is "Well we hadn't finished investigating that at the time." This is quite true because they don't have access to the things they need to make a case for breach of the emoluments act yet, i.e. Trump's Financial Records and Tax Returns, and they have not had all the testimony of those that could talk to the Obstruction efforts.

It is a bit hard to start Impeachment proceedings before you finish investigating, and in fairness, the Committee was already throwing around the "I" word prior to the Ukraine Incident being made public.
__________________

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)

PhantomWolf is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th September 2019, 07:24 PM   #214
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 45,623
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
I think most Americans can figure out that extortion is a crime. What matters is if they give a damn.
I also think that , crime or not, most Amereican who are not the GOP base think that a POTUS seeking the help of a foreign country to attack a domestic political opponent is really, really, bad.
__________________
Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty.

Robert Heinlein.
dudalb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th September 2019, 07:35 PM   #215
PhantomWolf
Penultimate Amazing
 
PhantomWolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 18,749
Originally Posted by dudalb View Post
I also think that , crime or not, most Amereican who are not the GOP base think that a POTUS seeking the help of a foreign country to attack a domestic political opponent is really, really, bad.
I think that most of the GOP Base would agree than a POTUS seeking the help of a foreign country to attack a domestic political opponent is really, really, bad too, as long as that President was a Democrat.
__________________

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)

PhantomWolf is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th September 2019, 07:55 PM   #216
Stacyhs
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 9,032
Originally Posted by PhantomWolf View Post
I think that most of the GOP Base would agree than a POTUS seeking the help of a foreign country to attack a domestic political opponent is really, really, bad too, as long as that President was a Democrat.
Exactly. As it's Trump, it's all fake news and not really extortion. He's just misunderstood.
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th September 2019, 08:20 PM   #217
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 12,507
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
Here's my take. If you have to look at what happened and say that when he did this that fits the definition of this other thing, what you have is a nothingburger.

So, when he used the word "though" in a sentence, that clearly meant that there was a connection between this and that, and that means it was extortion, which is really bribery, which is impeachable and...……..where were we?

Nixon held out a long time against that sort of thing. Finally, though, he had to release a tape where he was saying, "What if we gave this guy a million dollars to not testify?" (Not a direct quote, but not a distortion of what was said, either.) At that point, his public support vanished, and his congressional support dried up at the same time.

Find a crime that The Donald has committed that you don't have to explain to ordinary people why it's a crime, and then you'll have something that can win.
If you have to explain to your people that soliciting help from a foreign government (under threat of withholding funds if they won't) to attack a political opponent then your country is in a very sorry state.
__________________
“Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore - if they're white!"
If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list.
This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th September 2019, 08:27 PM   #218
xjx388
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 7,317
Originally Posted by PhantomWolf View Post
The main answer to that is "Well we hadn't finished investigating that at the time." This is quite true because they don't have access to the things they need to make a case for breach of the emoluments act yet, i.e. Trump's Financial Records and Tax Returns, and they have not had all the testimony of those that could talk to the Obstruction efforts.



It is a bit hard to start Impeachment proceedings before you finish investigating, and in fairness, the Committee was already throwing around the "I" word prior to the Ukraine Incident being made public.


Mueller did all the investigating and made the case for obstruction; all they had to do was start the impeachment inquiry. They didn’t. Even though they arguably had more and better quality evidence than they do for the Ukraine affair.

They’ve been throwing around the “I” word almost since Trump took office. At some point they had to **** or get off the pot. I think they waited too long to ****.
__________________
Hello.
xjx388 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th September 2019, 12:10 AM   #219
The Great Zaganza
Maledictorian
 
The Great Zaganza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 9,816
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
Mueller did all the investigating and made the case for obstruction; all they had to do was start the impeachment inquiry. They didn’t. Even though they arguably had more and better quality evidence than they do for the Ukraine affair.

They’ve been throwing around the “I” word almost since Trump took office. At some point they had to **** or get off the pot. I think they waited too long to ****.
disagree.

Impeachment is a political process, and the Mueller Report was an attempt to make it judicial ... which in hindsight was bound to fail with a President who only cares about what he can get away with. Moreover, there was a strong sense in many voters to let bygones be bygones.

The Ukraine Scandal is political in a way that is of immediate urgency, something that cannot be solved by waiting to get Trump voted out, because, unlike the Mueller Report, it concerns the Future, not the Past.
The Great Zaganza is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th September 2019, 12:13 AM   #220
WilliamSeger
Philosopher
 
WilliamSeger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,021
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
Mueller did all the investigating and made the case for obstruction; all they had to do was start the impeachment inquiry. They didn’t. Even though they arguably had more and better quality evidence than they do for the Ukraine affair.

They’ve been throwing around the “I” word almost since Trump took office. At some point they had to **** or get off the pot. I think they waited too long to ****.
Uh huh, heads Republicans win, tails Democrats lose. Maybe.
WilliamSeger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2019, 06:25 AM   #221
Safe-Keeper
Philosopher
 
Safe-Keeper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 8,580
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
Find a crime that The Donald has committed that you don't have to explain to ordinary people why it's a crime, and then you'll have something that can win.
He's done and said horrible things since day one without his disciples caring, but you have a point.

Though yes, as another poster said, the country is in a sorry state if the reason why "I'm witholding my government's money unless you dig up something about my political opponent" is terrible has to be explained to the masses. That's like banana republic-level corruption, or something I expect out of some Sub-Saharan failed state.
__________________
In choosing to support humanitarian organizations, it's best to choose those that do not have "militant wings" (Mycroft, 2013)
Safe-Keeper is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th September 2019, 01:36 PM   #222
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 76,067
There's a thorough discussion of the pros and cons of what to include in my post here. It's very good.

Brookings Institute panel discussion on the impeachment.
__________________
That new avatar is cuteness overload.
Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.

Last edited by Skeptic Ginger; 30th September 2019 at 01:37 PM.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th September 2019, 01:41 PM   #223
portlandatheist
Illuminator
 
portlandatheist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,185
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
If you have to explain to your people that soliciting help from a foreign government (under threat of withholding funds if they won't) to attack a political opponent then your country is in a very sorry state.
You are correct. Our country is in a very sorry state indeed.
portlandatheist is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th September 2019, 01:42 PM   #224
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 45,623
Pretty clear by now that, barring new developments, it's going to pretty much just focus on the Ukraine charges.
__________________
Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty.

Robert Heinlein.
dudalb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th September 2019, 01:43 PM   #225
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 45,623
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
If you have to explain to your people that soliciting help from a foreign government (under threat of withholding funds if they won't) to attack a political opponent then your country is in a very sorry state.
I think it's more a certain poster is trying to be the Contrarian way too hard.
__________________
Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty.

Robert Heinlein.
dudalb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th September 2019, 02:01 PM   #226
WilliamSeger
Philosopher
 
WilliamSeger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,021
Originally Posted by dudalb View Post
Pretty clear by now that, barring new developments, it's going to pretty much just focus on the Ukraine charges.
I wouldn't bet against something worse oozing out of the swamp, but it's 100% certain there will be new developments in the Ukrainian shakedown. Like this:

New Details Emerge on Ukraine’s Trump Admin Lobbying Blitz
Quote:
Lobbyists representing then-Ukrainian President-elect Volodymyr Zelensky's campaign met or corresponded with 10 Trump administration officials in the days surrounding Zelensky’s April election, according to foreign-agent filings with the Department of Justice.

Those contacts, which occurred throughout April, coincided with an effort by President Trump and his personal attorney Rudy Giuliani to press for additional scrutiny of former Vice President Joe Biden’s son’s business dealings in Ukraine, efforts that are now at the center of an impeachment inquiry into the president.
Wow, Trump was fighting against corruption in Ukraine starting in April. What a hero. Modesty kept him from telling us, of course.
WilliamSeger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th September 2019, 02:55 PM   #227
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 76,067
Originally Posted by dudalb View Post
Pretty clear by now that, barring new developments, it's going to pretty much just focus on the Ukraine charges.
How do you know that?

So many people in this thread are all full of conclusions that are unsupported. Listen to (or read the transcript) of the Brookings Institute analysis I linked to. Maybe you won't be so sure of yourself.

From the Brookings Institute Panel link:
Quote:
SUSAN MADE A POWERFUL CASE FOR QUITE A FEW ARTICLES RELATED NOT JUST TO UKRAINE BUT TO OTHER MATTERS. YET JOHN, CHANNELING THE MODERATE DEMOCRATS IN THE HOUSE, SUGGESTS THAT TOO BROUGHT WILL BE PROBLEMATIC AND TO ADD AN ELEMENT, I'VE HEARD THE ARGUMENT MADE THAT YOU NEED AT LEAST MULTIPLE ARTICLES SO SOME REPUBLICANS MIGHT BE ABLE TO VOTE NO ON SOME IN ORDER TO VOTE YES ON ONE AND IT ONLY TAKES ONE. I WOULD LIKE YOU TO TALK ABOUT HOW THE POLITICS AND THE CONSTITUTIONAL RESPONSIBILITY AND POLICY INTERACT IN THIS ARGUMENT ABOUT ARTICLES OF IMPEACHMENT.
__________________
That new avatar is cuteness overload.
Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.

Last edited by Skeptic Ginger; 30th September 2019 at 03:08 PM.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th September 2019, 03:19 PM   #228
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 45,623
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
How do you know that?

So many people in this thread are all full of conclusions that are unsupported. Listen to (or read the transcript) of the Brookings Institute analysis I linked to. Maybe you won't be so sure of yourself.

From the Brookings Institute Panel link:
Based upon everything I am reading that Pelosi and Schiff want a narrowly focused inquiry.

The Kitchen Sink approach might be emotioinally satisfied but from a legal POV is not a smart way to go.
__________________
Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty.

Robert Heinlein.
dudalb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th September 2019, 04:04 PM   #229
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 76,067
Originally Posted by dudalb View Post
Based upon everything I am reading that Pelosi and Schiff want a narrowly focused inquiry.

The Kitchen Sink approach might be emotioinally satisfied but from a legal POV is not a smart way to go.
So you didn't bother to look at my link then. Got it. Everything is so simple when you make decisions and draw conclusions based on those little black and white cues instead of taking the time to actually look at the full list of pros and cons.

Those are only two of many choices. And it's not about emotional satisfaction, it's about the pros and cons. Too few charges and you can lose the case just as easily as too many charges. In addition, not including the Mueller obstruction charges means you are saying that is OK for the next POTUS to do the same.


BTW, I heard Schiff myself and he did not say he was looking at a narrow focus, but if the news media cut the sound bite off after his first sentence and ignored the second one, that's what you would have heard.
__________________
That new avatar is cuteness overload.
Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.

Last edited by Skeptic Ginger; 30th September 2019 at 04:08 PM.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th September 2019, 04:42 PM   #230
fishbob
Seasonally Disaffected
 
fishbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Chilly Undieville
Posts: 7,076
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
He keeps winning.

I'm not saying y'all are wrong on the moral issues, but in
terms of strategy and public relations, he seems to be doing ok.

Re the OP. You have to convince people that there's a very serious issue. Nothing that happened before the whistleblower scandal meets that standard. Don't try to dredge them up again in the hopes that things will be different this time.
Fox News, let me repeat - Fox News, has started calling out some of Trump's minions on the air. You have to be losing pretty egregiously for Fox News to start acting like news.
__________________
"When you believe in things you don't understand, then you suffer . . . " - Stevie Wonder.
"It looks like the saddest, most crookedest candy corn in an otherwise normal bag of candy corns." Stormy Daniels
I hate bigots.
fishbob is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st October 2019, 04:53 PM   #231
PhantomWolf
Penultimate Amazing
 
PhantomWolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 18,749
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
(or read the transcript)
From your quotes it seems to be a wall of unformatted capital letters. Even the small bits that you post are unreadable, no one is going to read the entire thing.
__________________

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)

PhantomWolf is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st October 2019, 04:57 PM   #232
PhantomWolf
Penultimate Amazing
 
PhantomWolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 18,749
Originally Posted by fishbob View Post
Fox News, let me repeat - Fox News, has started calling out some of Trump's minions on the air. You have to be losing pretty egregiously for Fox News to start acting like news.
To be fair the actual News part of FOX is and has always been reasonably good, it's the non-news News parts, such as Hanity and co, who are so far right leaning it's amazing that they don't fall over.

What this has done is to start a bit of a civil war on FOX between their actual News Anchors and their News Commentators to the point that several have apparently been told to stop sniping at each other on the air.
__________________

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)

PhantomWolf is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd October 2019, 09:09 AM   #233
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 47,870
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
Find a crime that The Donald has committed that you don't have to explain to ordinary people why it's a crime, and then you'll have something that can win.
As opposed to the intricacies of email servers and classified data, those are easy sells. And of course Benghazi too simple easy crimes for anyone to see. Why were they able to grasp those crimes but obstruction of justice is of course beyond any republican to comprehend?
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd October 2019, 09:16 AM   #234
The Great Zaganza
Maledictorian
 
The Great Zaganza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 9,816
Right.
Having a son who gets a big salary is proof of your corruption, but paying hush-money to adult film actors and covering it up during a campaign is somehow ambiguous.
The Great Zaganza is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd October 2019, 09:21 AM   #235
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 85,100
Originally Posted by PhantomWolf View Post
What this has done is to start a bit of a civil war on FOX between their actual News Anchors and their News Commentators to the point that several have apparently been told to stop sniping at each other on the air.
Bwa ha ha ha ha!
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd October 2019, 12:04 PM   #236
Tero
Graduate Poster
 
Tero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: North American prairie
Posts: 1,613
With Barr as his ally, Trump could push this thing going very far until December recess and then to January.
Would that help him? The more time we wait, the more items Trump will face.
Tero is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd October 2019, 12:06 PM   #237
rockysmith76
Thinker
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Posts: 236
Colluding withe Russians, Inciting Civil War.
rockysmith76 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd October 2019, 12:07 PM   #238
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 85,100
Originally Posted by rockysmith76 View Post
Colluding withe Russians, Inciting Civil War.
Inciting violence is certainly something that could be thrown at him.

Hell, there are so many things that it would be nigh impossible to throw all of them at him.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd October 2019, 12:23 PM   #239
Dr. Keith
Not a doctor.
 
Dr. Keith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 19,126
Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza View Post
disagree.

Impeachment is a political process, and the Mueller Report was an attempt to make it judicial ... which in hindsight was bound to fail with a President who only cares about what he can get away with. Moreover, there was a strong sense in many voters to let bygones be bygones.

The Ukraine Scandal is political in a way that is of immediate urgency, something that cannot be solved by waiting to get Trump voted out, because, unlike the Mueller Report, it concerns the Future, not the Past.
Very good post. Especially the highlighted. People can be forgiving if the bad action is in the past and really didn't pan out to be so horrible after all. (Look, I still have my job.) But, being caught in the process of doing the bad act all over again is more of a problem for most people.

Not all, probably not my mother-in-law, but most people.
__________________
Suffering is not a punishment not a fruit of sin, it is a gift of God.
He allows us to share in His suffering and to make up for the sins of the world. -Mother Teresa

If I had a pet panda I would name it Snowflake.
Dr. Keith is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd October 2019, 03:40 PM   #240
Upchurch
Papa Funkosophy
 
Upchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 31,769
Okay, as I read the things, but IANAL, the obvious crime(s) is that Trump solicited a bribe from the President of Ukraine as well as illegally soliciting aid from a foreign nation in a US election. That last one being the kind of collusion Trump has been denying he did with Russia.

Am I too far from the mark on this?
__________________
"There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact." -- Sherlock Holmes.
"It’s easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled." -- Mark Twain, maybe.
Upchurch is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:24 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.