Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
  On 1/31/2020 at 4:09 AM, Gil Bang said:

 

Expand  

Interesting. He’s admitting that trump did what he’s accused of doing but saying it just doesn’t matter.

Pretty much a perfect encapsulation of the modern day GOP. 
 

Rules don’t matter. Every man for himself. The party of nihilism. The party of Johnny Sack.

  • Like 2
Posted
  On 1/31/2020 at 4:04 AM, DDD Dad said:

Manu Raju is reporting Alexander is a no.

Based on the question he posed today I’m not surprised (with Cruz and others asking about the prior bipartisan impeachment votes).

Expand  

I might have missed it, but did Romney or Murkowski  say they'd vote against witnesses?  I thought there was still a shot at 50 votes + Roberts, given Collins is in favor of witnesses.

Posted

It won’t come to that.

Even with 50 motion for witnesses would fail (no tiebreaker vote).

I know NYT has a piece suggesting otherwise but I disagree.

Posted
  On 1/31/2020 at 4:21 AM, DDD Dad said:

It won’t come to that.

Even with 50 motion for witnesses would fail (no tiebreaker vote).

I know NYT has a piece suggesting otherwise but I disagree.

Expand  

Actually Roberts can break the tie if he wants to. He probably won’t though.

Posted

I guess most likely is 51-49 NO and the nazis take it, but my personal bet is 50-50 with Roberts abstaining and then united GOP vote to overturn as it provides maximum cover while confusing the voters with parliamentary BS.

“Oh, I voted FOR witnesses before I voted against them...”

Posted
  On 1/31/2020 at 4:18 AM, Gap03 said:
I might have missed it, but did Romney or Murkowski  say they'd vote against witnesses?  I thought there was still a shot at 50 votes + Roberts, given Collins is in favor of witnesses.

Sorry, I didn’t answer your question. NYT reports Romney has confirmed he supports witnesses and documents. Nothing yet from Murkowski.
Posted
  On 1/31/2020 at 4:30 AM, JimmyJames said:

Actually Roberts can break the tie if he wants to. He probably won’t though.

Expand  

I'll be shocked if this cake wasn't baked before tonight.  There's almost no way they'll get to a position where Roberts might screw them over.  This was 51-49 "hey, we were serious about the process and we considered the evidence but ultimately just couldn't see the need for witnesses" all along.

Posted

This whole sham of a trial is a perfectly orchestrated Moscow Mitch soviet style “trial.”

Hes known about Bolton for months. The leak on Sunday. The outrage on Monday. The calming on Tuesday, and blah blah blah.

Murkawski has been told to hold off until Moscow Mitch knows what Roberts will do. Will he break a 50-50 tie and order witnesses? Then it will never come to that and Murkawski will vote no making it 51-49. If he won’t order witnesses she votes yes making it 50-50 and then nothing happens.

Its all a farce.

  • Like 2
Posted
  On 1/31/2020 at 4:34 AM, jimmyjazz said:
I'll be shocked if this cake wasn't baked before tonight.  There's almost no way they'll get to a position where Roberts might screw them over.  This was 51-49 "hey, we were serious about the process and we considered the evidence but ultimately just couldn't see the need for witnesses" all along.

Yep. It’s never been in doubt, and the Republicans threw Collins a bone that they hope will help her re-election chances. A complete farce.
  • Like 2
Posted

I mean it’s actually too fucking obvious. Two republicans are a hard yes with one a soft yes and a few undecideds. You would think they could make it less obvious but I guess not.

The really scary thing is they just don’t give a shit. Ken Starr lamenting about the age of impeachment is just a giant fuck you to everyone. 

We do what we want. Fuck your feelings. 

  • Like 1
Posted
  On 1/31/2020 at 4:50 AM, JimmyJames said:
I mean it’s actually too fucking obvious. Two republicans are a hard yes with one a soft yes and a few undecideds. You would think they could make it less obvious but I guess not.
The really scary thing is they just don’t give a shit. Ken Starr lamenting about the age of impeachment is just a giant fuck you to everyone. 
We do what we want. Fuck your feelings. 

I will never forget Trump inviting Henry fucking Kissinger to the White House the day after the Comey firing. Just a giant middle finger to everyone.
Posted
  On 1/31/2020 at 4:21 AM, DDD Dad said:

It won’t come to that.

Even with 50 motion for witnesses would fail (no tiebreaker vote).

I know NYT has a piece suggesting otherwise but I disagree.

Expand  

Yeah. If Roberts tries to intervene there will be a weird constitutional crisis.  Even democrat Senators have admitted 51 are needed. The only precedent, I believe, was in the 1860s or 70s and highly controversial. 

Posted
  On 1/31/2020 at 5:04 AM, A-Tex Devil said:

Yeah. If Roberts tries to intervene there will be a weird constitutional crisis.  Even democrat Senators have admitted 51 are needed. The only precedent, I believe, was in the 1860s or 70s and highly controversial. 

Expand  

Armybrat should weigh in here.

  • Like 4
  • Haha 1
Posted
  On 1/31/2020 at 5:33 AM, TexArcher said:

Of course we're not getting witnesses and of course Trump is getting acquitted.  This was only going to end one way.

Schiff was brilliant.  And none of the people who needed to hear it did.

And the fact is that a big percentage of this country cares more about figuring out who the next masked singer is than whether or not Trump is removed from office.

We actually have a reality tv star, a slum lord, a money launderer, a rapist, and a racist in the White House at the same time.  He abused his power, obstructed justice, and violated the Separation of Powers laid out in the Constitution.  And the people in the very body whose power he usurped are unanimous that he did all of that, and more than half of them want him to remain in power anyway, because it helps them remain in power.

And I'm afraid that we're going to find out that if this show moved the needle at all, it moved it toward Trump.  After he's acquitted, he'll have a witch hunt narrative he can actually sell.

This isn't the country I grew up in.  Donald Trump would've been laughed out of the primary 30 years ago.  Look at us now, dumbed down by 20+ years of Fox News, spiraling public education, and mindless reality tv.  We're a dying star, slowly burning itself out.  The future is China's and eventually India's.  We will become a former superpower relegated to mid-major status, like Spain or Portugal.  It's already started.

And you know what?  We deserve it.  Any country where the last 3.5 years could happen doesn't deserve to be leading anyone.

 

Expand  

Just think if he wins again. And the Democrats lose the House.

That could happen.

Posted
  On 1/31/2020 at 6:35 AM, Bama Chick said:

Go do this to cheer yourselves up a bit.

 

 


Trump isn’t winning in November.
The Democrats majorly in the House will get larger.

And we’re also taking the Senate.

Entertaining the thoughts of anything less makes me almost homicidal, so I refuse to do it.

 

Expand  

From what I saw, he did an admirable job.

Posted
  On 1/31/2020 at 6:35 AM, Bama Chick said:

Go do this to cheer yourselves up a bit.

 

 


Trump isn’t winning in November.
The Democrats majorly in the House will get larger.

And we’re also taking the Senate.

Entertaining the thoughts of anything less makes me almost homicidal, so I refuse to do it.

 

Expand  

that link didn't seem to work.

https://www.jfklibrary.org/events-and-awards/profile-in-courage-award

  • Like 1
Posted
  On 1/31/2020 at 6:47 AM, Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand said:

From what I saw, he did an admirable job.

Expand  

Adam Schiff for President! Only half joking. The democratic primary has gone about as bad as possible if the goal for the prospects of beating Trump. Most likely outcomes are Biden with a bunch of pissed off progressives or Bernie and god knows what. The chaos in the party either way will lay the groundwork for Trump's victory. Plus, why shouldn't he just call up Putin tomorrow and say "I've been thinking about lifting Russian sanctions in the national interest. And uhh... oh yeah, we need you to do us a favor. You remember those Russian intelligence guys you had helping us out in 2016. Can they fire up their operation again? No quid pro quo! Thanks, Vlad!" This is a dark day and a majority of the country is clueless. 

 

 

  • Like 1
Posted
  On 1/31/2020 at 6:35 AM, Bama Chick said:

Go do this to cheer yourselves up a bit.

 

 


Trump isn’t winning in November.
The Democrats majorly in the House will get larger.

And we’re also taking the Senate.

Entertaining the thoughts of anything less makes me almost homicidal, so I refuse to do it.

Expand  

I'm keeping the bar lower than that.  Make sure my Texas state rep and senator are reelected (we drove the Trumpistas out in 2018) and grow the advantage in the House and narrow it in the Senate. 

Entertaining the thoughts of more will kill me.

Posted (edited)
  On 1/31/2020 at 3:30 AM, JimmyJames said:

The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court is actually given a lot of power in an impeachment trial. It’s not recognized because it’s happened so rarely and the judicial branch has always been supposed to be number 3 when it comes to power after the executive and the congress. Roberts is so far being a pussy in my opinion. 
 

The framers intended it that way that the courts were number 3 but we’re supposed to have power over impeachment.

Marbury v. Madison, however, was the ultimate court power grab and for some strange reason it worked. 
 

It’s the senate that’s relinquishing it’s power here to emperor trump. That’s because Moscow Mitch is an amoral power hungry asshole. 

Expand  

Show your work.

Edited by TwiceHorn
Posted
  On 1/31/2020 at 12:12 PM, TwiceHorn said:

Show your work.

Expand  

He can break a tie in the senate, just like the Vice President normally could.

I guess a better answer would be the Chief Justice has as much power during an impeachment trial as the Vice President normally would in the Senate. 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.scotusblog.com/2020/01/the-role-of-the-chief-justice-in-an-impeachment-trial/amp/

Posted (edited)
  On 1/31/2020 at 12:24 PM, JimmyJames said:

He can break a tie in the senate, just like the Vice President normally could.

I guess a better answer would be the Chief Justice has as much power during an impeachment trial as the Vice President normally would in the Senate. 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.scotusblog.com/2020/01/the-role-of-the-chief-justice-in-an-impeachment-trial/amp/

Expand  

Which isn't much.  As that very article notes.

When you think about it, it sort of makes sense.  Despite using the word "tried" in the Senate, ultimately impeachment is governed by a vote of the members of the respective houses.  They do that all the time, under rules they set up.  They even hold hearings and take "evidence," or at least testimony.

Not only is the impeachment process political, but it's really legislative in nature. 

It's unfortunate for the current proceeding, but all this wishing for a strong judge to come in and make them observe rules of evidence and procedure really has no basis in anything.

Edited by TwiceHorn
Posted
  On 1/31/2020 at 4:14 AM, JimmyJames said:

Interesting. He’s admitting that trump did what he’s accused of doing but saying it just doesn’t matter.

Pretty much a perfect encapsulation of the modern day GOP. 
 

Rules don’t matter. Every man for himself. The party of nihilism. The party of Johnny Sack.

Expand  

Dersch’s wacky opinion gave them the cover they needed. Fuck that guy so hard. 

Posted
  On 1/31/2020 at 12:27 PM, TwiceHorn said:

Which isn't much.

 

Expand  

I disagree. The notion that Roberts has little power stems from the obvious fact his rulings can be overruled by a majority vote. 
 

If there’s one thing we know about Moscow  Mitch and the GOP coward crew in the Senate, they don’t like to have to make tough votes, which overruling a Chief Justice would be.

Posted
  On 1/31/2020 at 12:30 PM, JimmyJames said:

I disagree. The notion that Roberts has little power stems from the obvious fact his rulings can be overruled by a majority vote. 
 

If there’s one thing we know about Moscow  Mitch and the GOP coward crew in the Senate, they don’t like to have to make tough votes, which overruling a Chief Justice would be.

Expand  

And someone has to ask him to rule on something, which no one is likely to do.

Posted

That's just a poll, and not a particularly informative one at that. But then consider the source. 

Cutting and pasting your opinions directly from Fox News doesn't make you politically informed or involved. Or relevant. 

  • Like 2
Posted

Now a group of Russian oligarchs have their banking restrictions removed the day before a huge vote in the Senate by the Treasury.   Wonder how much of that money is going to make it in into GOP coffers in the next year?



×
×
  • Create New...