The Senate Trial of Donald J Trump 2020

[JimmyJames 12271]

Has Ken Starr addressed the fact that whenever there is a rape somewhere he always seems to be around? 

[JimmyJames 12271]

2 minutes ago, SuingToGetAMessageBoard? said:

 

 

there is a ton of writing about what it takes to be an impeachable offense.  if that tweet is a true reflection of starr's argument, he's off the rails.  it also occurs to me that a trial judge can shut down argument that is contrary to the law.  seems like roberts has that option here, no?

 

 

He has that option but no way is he going to use it. This is not a normal trial because the jurors actually are the ultimate decision makers when it comes to procedure. 

[Js1 85320]

 

[Mrs Whiggins 13050]

2 minutes ago, JimmyJames said:

He has that option but no way is he going to use it. This is not a normal trial because the jurors actually are the ultimate decision makers when it comes to procedure. 

The way this trial is going, I picture Roberts as the bartender in every lonely hearts movie/rom com/tv drama since time began. He's up there polishing glasses, nodding his head now and then as the the lawyer pours out his heart and talks to himself, he's wordlessly refilling the drink when the lawyer runs dry, and in the end, the lawyer walks out the door no wiser but definitely poorer for the one-sided conversation. But, he's drunk so he's got that going for him.

[Tuco 5076]

4 minutes ago, Js1 said:

 

And he would fight tooth and nail to make sure that others cannot confirm the allegations. 

Edited January 27, 2020 by Tuco

[TwiceHorn 31457]

Last time I checked, live witnesses would first be deposed in private.  That would mitigate some of the surprise potential.

[El Diablo 4232]

12 minutes ago, SuingToGetAMessageBoard? said:

 

 

there is a ton of writing about what it takes to be an impeachable offense.  if that tweet is a true reflection of starr's argument, he's off the rails.  it also occurs to me that a trial judge can shut down argument that is contrary to the law.  seems like roberts has that option here, no?

 

 

Part of the situation at Baylor was due to Starr's interpretation of the law - he felt that parts of Title IX were unlawful, particularly enforcement of the "Dear Colleagues" take that was promulgated. Many suspect that he drug his feet on implementing the required changes in hopes that there would be a chance to fight it in court. Oops.

[LABEVO 928]

2 hours ago, Ghost of LL said:

I actually think Bolton is an honest man.  That's what worries me.  He may believe that there is a deeper honesty (to the country, to the Constitution, to posterity, whatever) in undermining the Democrats.

It's like Jack Sparrow said: "a dishonest man you can always trust to be dishonest. Honestly. It's the honest ones you want to watch out for, because you can never predict when they're going to do something incredibly stupid.”

I see his deeper honesty differently. Bolton believes he so right about realpolitik for international relations that he doesn't care if he burns Republicans. 

[TwiceHorn 31457]

3 minutes ago, LABEVO said:

I see his deeper honesty differently. Bolton believes he so right about realpolitik for international relations that he doesn't care if he burns Republicans. 

I tend to agree.  He's an ideologue for his own brand of foreign policy.  He had use for Trump when he was appointed, and no use for him thereafter.

Still, none of this is a substitute for knowing what he will say.

[DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt 12301]

2 minutes ago, LABEVO said:

I see his deeper honesty differently. Bolton believes he so right about realpolitik for international relations that he doesn't care if he burns Republicans. 

to go a bit further, i think he sees Trumpism as a deathblow to his brand of republicanism.

as for the senate being blindsided here, i'm of the opinion that mcconnell probably knew about the manuscript but kept it a secret from his colleagues. he probably weighed the risks of telling them (and knowing doing so would ensure he lost 4 votes against witnesses) versus not (with the assumption it wouldn't leak until after the trial) and decided to keep his mouth shut. IF that is the case, GOP unity goes up in flames here.

[Mrs Whiggins 13050]

This article is from 2018 but the author retweeted it and it does provide some back story to side angles.

 

[TwiceHorn 31457]

12 minutes ago, El Diablo said:

Part of the situation at Baylor was due to Starr's interpretation of the law - he felt that parts of Title IX were unlawful, particularly enforcement of the "Dear Colleagues" take that was promulgated. Many suspect that he drug his feet on implementing the required changes in hopes that there would be a chance to fight it in court. Oops.

That's probably accurate about Kenneth Starr.  At its best, law is a reflection of the morality of the society that has it.  At its worst, it's a bad facsimile of any kind of morality at all.

Starr has a habit of geeking out on the law so that it becomes the latter.  He's not alone on that. A lot of professorial types are that way and Supreme Court justices, too.

Edited January 27, 2020 by TwiceHorn

[Lagunamadre 1975]

2 hours ago, Beantown Express 2.0 said:

Would it be that hard for any of the media to pull the board of directors of the Fortune Top 20 companies and see who on each board is an expert in that field and what they are paid?  Pretty sure not everyone on the board of Exxon is a O&G person or UHCs board are experts on insurance, etc....plus they are probably paid more than 50K a month.  Not saying Hunter Biden is clean but this is complaining someone got a job because of their family name Or help from their parents which means we would have to go after most of the upper class in this country.

Exactly. That's what get's lost in all of this. When people say Hunter Biden is not qualified or not an expert in European Nat Gas they should be called out on it. One, boards are not made up of experts in the field of that company, go look at Exxon, Disney, Apple, etc. board, it's a bunch of ambassadors and retired execs from other industries. Two, Hunter is a Yale Law graduate, practicing attorney, co-founder of a venture capital firm and was a board member of Amtrak (appointed by GW Bush) and the World Hunger Program. That CV is good enough to be on almost any damn board out there. 

Call him as a witness. Tell the truth. There is nothing untoward behind it, if there were it sure as fuck would have come out by now. 

[henrygandorf 29190]

as much as i agree with the sentiment (bolton can't be trusted), i'm not sure i see the upside of him pushing back or lying if called.  he's 71.  it's not like he has some long career waiting for him after this.  he'll sell his book, he'll go on the lecture circuit, he'll sit on a few boards, whatever.  he'll be fine, and plenty of people will come out of hiding to praise him.  plenty of bush republicans still roaming around.

he probably thinks (like many of us hope) that trumpism will come and go, and then things will settle back to a place he likes and is more familiar with.  he also doesn't seem like the type that's ok with trump having the last laugh in their relationship.

[TwiceHorn 31457]

5 minutes ago, Lagunamadre said:

Exactly. That's what get's lost in all of this. When people say Hunter Biden is not qualified or not an expert in European Nat Gas they should be called out on it. One, boards are not made up of experts in the field of that company, go look at Exxon, Disney, Apple, etc. board, it's a bunch of ambassadors and retired execs from other industries. Two, Hunter is a Yale Law graduate, practicing attorney, co-founder of a venture capital firm and was a board member of Amtrak (appointed by GW Bush) and the World Hunger Program. That CV is good enough to be on almost any damn board out there. 

Call him as a witness. Tell the truth. There is nothing untoward behind it, if there were it sure as fuck would have come out by now. 

Yuuuuuup.  A lot of corporate board members have zero experience in the corporation's industry.  They may offer some other type of "wisdom" or nothing at all.

There was a time in the US when any high-ranking lawyer in a corporation was a CEO candidate because of their purported judgment.  That's no longer true now that next-quarter's-stock-price is the only meaningful metric of corporate performance.  But, a law degree is often viewed as an adequate qualification for corporate governance, all by itself.

Edited January 27, 2020 by TwiceHorn

[Amos Moses 795]

3 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

There was a time in the US when any high-ranking lawyer in a corporation was a CEO candidate because of their purported judgment.  That's no longer true now that next-quarter's-stock-price is the only meaningful metric of corporate performance. 

And most companies don’t want the lawyers running things.

[Tuco 5076]

7 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

as much as i agree with the sentiment (bolton can't be trusted), i'm not sure i see the upside of him pushing back or lying if called.  he's 71.  it's not like he has some long career waiting for him after this.  he'll sell his book, he'll go on the lecture circuit, he'll sit on a few boards, whatever.  he'll be fine, and plenty of people will come out of hiding to praise him.  plenty of bush republicans still roaming around.

he probably thinks (like many of us hope) that trumpism will come and go, and then things will settle back to a place he likes and is more familiar with.  he also doesn't seem like the type that's ok with trump having the last laugh in their relationship.

I also ask, what is the worst he could do that he couldn't already do without a subpoena? He could give a press conference tomorrow, without being under oath, and claim that Trump was sincerely concerned corruption in Ukraine, and that's why the aid was being withheld.  The Trojan Horse analogy only works if it was being used to get around some defense.  At worse, he could be anti-climatic.  It's not like the Dems are on some path to conviction, that might get derailed. 

[JimmyJames 12271]

1 minute ago, Tuco said:

I also ask, what is the worst he could do that he couldn't already do without a subpoena? He could give a press conference tomorrow, without being under oath, and claim that Trump was sincerely concerned corruption in Ukraine, and that's why the aid was being withheld.  The Trojan Horse analogy only works if it was being used to get around some defense.  At worse, he could be anti-climatic.  It's not like the Dems are on some path to conviction, that might get derailed. 

Exactly. There is zero risk to putting Bolton on the stand for the dems. It’s been obvious for a while what he knew and would eventually say.
 

It’s not like the dems have a slam dunk win that they might be throwing away with calling Bolton to the stand. The Republican senate at this point is almost as corrupt as trump.

You want mobsters throwing each other under the bus in order to beat them since they don’t play by normal rules. Think Goodfellas. 

[TXSG8R 3362]

Dont believe Sondland because he was speculating that Guiliani was involved.  But believe all these other people that are speculating the other way.  

[Bama Chick 28596]

lol Panic about it you orange ass licking propaganda artists.

[Mrs Whiggins 13050]

2 minutes ago, JimmyJames said:

 

It’s not like the dems have a slam dunk win that they might be throwing away with calling Bolton to the stand. The Republican senate at this point is almost as corrupt as trump.

Sure, look at Ron Johnson. He is slinking around behind the scenes because he's up to his neck in it. The most NRA $$ of anyone and wasn't Wisconsin a swing state in 2016? Hangs out with some unsavory characters. Meets with Pence et al to get the stories straight before the meeting was supposed to happen this last summer. He smells like smelt.

[yoladu 4094]

43 minutes ago, Js1 said:

 

Jesus Christ! Seemingly, the Republican argument is that every witness who has an association and/or interacts with Mr. Trump is not trustworthy and can't be credible.

Why is that? Quite an endorsement of this President.

 

I am sure there is some proverb that sums it up perfectly.

[Pig Bellmont 8717]

I’m enjoying the theory the WH ordered the Solemeini strike days after it received Bolton’s book in an effort to keep Bolton quiet. 

[Mdhorn 5949]

4 minutes ago, yoladu said:

Jesus Christ! Seemingly, the Republican argument is that every witness who has an association and/or interacts with Mr. Trump is not trustworthy and can't be credible.

Why is that? Quite an endorsement of this President.

 

I am sure there is some proverb that sums it up perfectly.

Must rep when available.  This is what I've been telling peeps.  DumbF'kinChief has difficulty hiring people that can't help but get incriminated or testify against him.  It's almost like he's a crook that surrounds himself with other criminal minded people.  If they're honest even a little bit, they're likely to testify, otherwise they're expected to take the fall.  The third group retired. 

[SuingToGetAMessageBoard? 3861]

6 minutes ago, Pig Bellmont said:

I’m enjoying the theory the WH ordered the Solemeini strike days after it received Bolton’s book in an effort to keep Bolton quiet. 

i also found that interesting.

[SuingToGetAMessageBoard? 3861]

it's not really the lying that offends me so much about the R party these days.  it's the stupidity.  i'm personally offended knowing that i'm smarter than some senators.

 

 

 

[Francisco 2.0 32389]

Like clockwork, Part 4

 

 

 

[Francisco 2.0 32389]

Oh hey!  More Lindsey hypocrisy 

 

 

 

[Pig Bellmont 8717]

3 minutes ago, SuingToGetAMessageBoard? said:

it's not really the lying that offends me so much about the R party these days.  it's the stupidity.  i'm personally offended knowing that i'm smarter than some senators.

 

 

 

Seriously. 1) federal rules of evidence don’t govern procedures in an impeachment and 2) party admissions are not hearsay. 
 

that shit drives me bonkers

[henrygandorf 29190]

2 minutes ago, Francisco 2.0 said:

Like clockwork, Part 4

 

 

 

so now we're admitting it's true, but calling him disloyal.

not a liar, not never-trumping scum, just disloyal.

sew a scarlet d on his chest and sign the fucking subpoena.  let's go.

[Mrs Whiggins 13050]

Philbin arguing against allowing  the witnesses. 
He also discussed due process if they allowed more testimony. I don’t quite  understand how that works. 
Maybe Trump should be deposed if they are worried about executive privilege? 

[yoladu 4094]

24 minutes ago, Pig Bellmont said:

I’m enjoying the theory the WH ordered the Solemeini strike days after it received Bolton’s book in an effort to keep Bolton quiet. 

[Pasken 1309]

28 minutes ago, Pig Bellmont said:

I’m enjoying the theory the WH ordered the Solemeini strike days after it received Bolton’s book in an effort to keep Bolton quiet. 

That might be a stretch.

[yoladu 4094]

19 minutes ago, Francisco 2.0 said:

Like clockwork, Part 4

 

 

 

Mafia mentality there. Rush sums up what it's always been about.

Loyalty is more valued than honor or truth (or the Constitution for that matter)

Edited January 27, 2020 by yoladu

[TXSG8R 3362]

7 minutes ago, yoladu said:

Mafia mentality there. Rush sums up what it's always been about.

Loyalty is more valued than honor or truth (or the Constitution for that matter)

Duty, honor, country

Trump, Lobbyists, Pandering to the base

[Brisketexan 105119]

1 hour ago, TwiceHorn said:

That's probably accurate about Kenneth Starr.  At its best, law is a reflection of the morality of the society that has it.  At its worst, it's a bad facsimile of any kind of morality at all.

Starr has a habit of geeking out on the law so that it becomes the latter.  He's not alone on that. A lot of professorial types are that way and Supreme Court justices, too.

Or -- and this is an alternate explanation -- he's a piece of shit dinosaur with antiquated views on women and their worth in society, and on top of that, archaic moral views that add up to "she was asking for it by partying with a bunch of....you know...."

Don't discount that explanation.  Because it's spot-fucking-on.

1 hour ago, TwiceHorn said:

Yuuuuuup.  A lot of corporate board members have zero experience in the corporation's industry.  They may offer some other type of "wisdom" or nothing at all.

There was a time in the US when any high-ranking lawyer in a corporation was a CEO candidate because of their purported judgment.  That's no longer true now that next-quarter's-stock-price is the only meaningful metric of corporate performance.  But, a law degree is often viewed as an adequate qualification for corporate governance, all by itself.

Was just discussing this earlier today -- some of the best board members I've ever known had no experience in the industry of the company on whose board they were sitting.  Which is fine.  The board member of a restaurant holding company isn't making decisions about the size of hamburger patties, or how to enhance the customer experience with different uniforms and easier-to-read menus.  He's looking at a much bigger picture of vision, expansion, space occupied in the industry, etc.  Which someone with good business experience across the board brings to the table.  

And as to the lawyer thing...

1 hour ago, Amos Moses said:

And most companies don’t want the lawyers running things.

....Maybe not, but in my experience with non-profits, they LOVE having at least one lawyer on the board.  Both because we have a broad legal perspective (and have an eye out for risk and liability) and because, by virtue of what we do -- represent a lot of different clients over the years -- we've seen some shit.  We've got a pretty good survey of what goes well and what goes poorly.

It's helpful to have a diverse skillset in the boardroom -- somebody who knows fundraising well, somebody who knows legal issues, somebody who knows marketing and communications, etc.  AND, lastly....it often doesn't hurt to have a recognized name on the board.  Like Royal, or Johnson, or....Biden.  It gets attention, it gives you some credibility with certain audiences.  That's just the way it is.  And yeah, it's even more so that way in economies that pay attention to shit like that, like Mexico, or Ukraine, or....the United States.

[Irieguy 1059]

2 hours ago, jimmyjazz said:

If some rich thoroughbred owner doesn't name his Kentucky Derby entry "Quid Pro Quo" I'm going to be very disappointed.

Quid Pro Go is better in my opinion. 

[JFKFC 4878]

Just a reminder that, someone who would know better than anyone else on Earth, feels that Trump is a Russian agent:

 

 

[elfenix 34238]

3 hours ago, Beantown Express 2.0 said:

Would it be that hard for any of the media to pull the board of directors of the Fortune Top 20 companies and see who on each board is an expert in that field and what they are paid?  Pretty sure not everyone on the board of Exxon is a O&G person or UHCs board are experts on insurance, etc....plus they are probably paid more than 50K a month.  Not saying Hunter Biden is clean but this is complaining someone got a job because of their family name Or help from their parents which means we would have to go after most of the upper class in this country.

fox could just go look at its own board - paul ryan sits on it. 

 

nevermind, that's a bad example, he's extremely experienced in shoveling  bullshit into the minds of old white men.

[DDD Dad 14338]

OMG When Pam Bondi just started talking I could have sworn it was Cecily Strong.

Imagine her with blonde hair.

 

Edited January 27, 2020 by DDD Dad

[Biff Tannen 45678]

6 minutes ago, JFKFC said:

Just a reminder that, someone who would know better than anyone else on Earth, feels that Trump is a Russian agent:

 

 

He has quite the resume.

Quote

Biography

Rolf Mowatt-Larssen is a Senior Fellow at the Belfer Center, having served until July 2019 as Director of the Center's Intelligence Project. Prior to that he was also a Senior Fellow.

Before coming to the Belfer Center, Mowatt-Larssen served over three years as the Director of Intelligence and Counterintelligence at the U.S. Department of Energy. Prior to this, he served for 23 years as a CIA intelligence officer in various domestic and international posts, to include Chief of the Europe Division in the Directorate of Operations, Chief of the Weapons of Mass Destruction Department, Counterterrorist Center, and Deputy Associate Director of Central Intelligence for Military Support. Prior to his career in intelligence, Mr. Mowatt-Larssen served as an officer in the U.S. Army. He is a graduate of the United States Military Academy, West Point, NY. He is married to Roswitha and has three children. He is a recipient of the CIA Director's Award, the George W. Bush Award for Excellence in Counterterrorism, the Secretary of Energy's Exceptional Service Medal, the Distinguished Career Intelligence Medal, Secretary of Defense Civilian Distinguished Service Medal, and the National Intelligence Superior Performance Medal, among others.

 

[Longhorn_Fan68 33869]

5 minutes ago, JFKFC said:

Just a reminder that, someone who would know better than anyone else on Earth, feels that Trump is a Russian agent:

 

 

yeah, at this point everything that the R's have been warning us for decades that the D's were going to do - well, they're doing them all. every fucking thing. it's insane

[Brisketexan 105119]

1 minute ago, elfenix said:

fox could just go look at its own board - paul ryan sits on it. 

 

nevermind, that's a bad example, he's extremely experienced in shoveling  bullshit into the minds of old white men.

Oh, I would think that a friendly re-direct of Hunter Biden pointing out the family members of Senators who sit on various boards, are "consultants" to various industries they don't know shit about, etc. would be fun.

Hey Senators, do you really WANT to go down the "my family members got sweet gigs because of their political connections" road?  Do you?  Okay then.....

[Brisketexan 105119]

1 minute ago, Biff Tannen said:

He has quite the resume.

But see, what you fail to see is, he's a communist socialist libtard who hates America.  Duh.

[Mrs Whiggins 13050]

Bondi is up. Burisma is the topic. Oh and Biden. 
 

 

[Mrs Whiggins 13050]

So, getting their talking points for Trump. 

[Lagunamadre 1975]

1 minute ago, Brisketexan said:

Oh, I would think that a friendly re-direct of Hunter Biden pointing out the family members of Senators who sit on various boards, are "consultants" to various industries they don't know shit about, etc. would be fun.

Hey Senators, do you really WANT to go down the "my family members got sweet gigs because of their political connections" road?  Do you?  Okay then.....

Let us all never forget that James Mattis was on the board of Theranos. 

[Longhorn_Fan68 33869]

6 minutes ago, Mrs Whiggins said:

Bondi is up. Burisma is the topic. Oh and Biden. 
 

 

this Pam Bondi?

 

[ChuckNorrisActionJeans 2666]

She strikes me so much like the "such as the Iraq" pageant girl.

[Mrs Whiggins 13050]

Ooo, y’all called it. Questioning his credentials, lecturing all about corruption. Quoted average board salaries but neglected to mention that  she wasn’t including stock options in that. 

All about Hunter.