The second impeachment of Donald Trump thread

[Boiler 46,086]

18 minutes ago, Lucky Cat said:

They were not protesters.  They were rioters....else they would not have been arrested.

They could have been Mainly Peaceful Protesters?

[Burnt Reynolds 5,058]

 

 

[Dashinka 24,786]

On 1/16/2021 at 1:52 PM, Steeleballz said:

 

   We tend to blame government, but at some point we have to look in the mirror. I accept that we sometimes elect people who really can't do the job, but sending them back to congress over and over when we know they can't get it done, there is no excuse for that. We can only blame the broken system for so much before we need to accept that we (the people) are part of why the system is broken.

Yes, we need to stop rewarding incumbency regardless of the person.

[Dashinka 24,786]

On 1/16/2021 at 11:16 AM, yuna628 said:

Not failed at all. They did in fact, impeach him, twice.

So what?  The House has descended into political partisanship and turned impeachment into a joke regardless of what kind of reverent tone Pelosi uses.  The first impeachment was a farce based on a concern of political corruption that has more hard evidence than the entire Russian collusion hoax (I am speaking of the Biden political crime family of course), and the second impeachment was a shoot from the hip affair with no evidence.  I still say Trump should ignore any Senate trial that occurs after tomorrow and not even show up or waste the taxpayers money on lawyers.  If the Senate votes to convict and remove an already removed President from office, along with keeping him and probably his family from seeking office, SCOTUS can sort it out (so Roberts should not participate either).  If SCOTUS upholds it, what would stop the House or the Senate from doing it to anyone else not even in office. 

[Boiler 46,086]

I think this could be the most divisive Administration in American history.

[Steeleballz 7,550]

1 minute ago, Boiler said:

I think this could be the most divisive Administration in American history.

  It definitely was, but fortunately one more day of Trump and it’s over.

[Burnt Reynolds 5,058]

18 minutes ago, Dashinka said:

So what?  The House has descended into political partisanship and turned impeachment into a joke regardless of what kind of reverent tone Pelosi uses.  The first impeachment was a farce based on a concern of political corruption that has more hard evidence than the entire Russian collusion hoax (I am speaking of the Biden political crime family of course), and the second impeachment was a shoot from the hip affair with no evidence.  I still say Trump should ignore any Senate trial that occurs after tomorrow and not even show up or waste the taxpayers money on lawyers.  If the Senate votes to convict and remove an already removed President from office, along with keeping him and probably his family from seeking office, SCOTUS can sort it out (so Roberts should not participate either).  If SCOTUS upholds it, what would stop the House or the Senate from doing it to anyone else not even in office. 

You just don't understand the metric of success for impeachment. You'd think its conviction, but you'd be wrong.. success is putting an asterisk next to Trump's name on Wikipedia. That's really what's important here.

 

4 minutes ago, Boiler said:

I think this could be the most divisive Administration in American history.

That's of the people though, who aren't important. What's important is the historical unification of the media, administrative state, intelligence bureaus, and party establishments. #ImStillWithHer

[TBoneTX 46,113]

1 hour ago, Dashinka said:

we need to stop rewarding incumbency

It is incumbent upon us to heed this.

[Dashinka 24,786]

4 hours ago, Steeleballz said:

  It definitely was, but fortunately one more day of Trump and it’s over.

I think he could have been referring to the future.

[Dashinka 24,786]

4 hours ago, Burnt Reynolds said:

You just don't understand the metric of success for impeachment. You'd think its conviction, but you'd be wrong.. success is putting an asterisk next to Trump's name on Wikipedia. That's really what's important here.

 

That's of the people though, who aren't important. What's important is the historical unification of the media, administrative state, intelligence bureaus, and party establishments. #ImStillWithHer

Hence Nancy’s “reverently” telling us what it is all about.

[Steeleballz 7,550]

19 minutes ago, Dashinka said:

I think he could have been referring to the future.

 

   It certainly works for the past 4 years. Biden may fail as well, and I don't have any great expectations, but he won't bring the absolute malignancy to the position that Trump brought. We will see though. No one here here can predict the future, although it is amusing watching people try at times. 

[moxy 1,051]

2 hours ago, Steeleballz said:

 

   It certainly works for the past 4 years. Biden may fail as well, and I don't have any great expectations, but he won't bring the absolute malignancy to the position that Trump brought. We will see though. No one here here can predict the future, although it is amusing watching people try at times. 

At this point I'll be happy with just treating the office with a modicum of dignity, and speaking intelligently about complex subjects.

[Steeleballz 7,550]

8 minutes ago, moxy said:

At this point I'll be happy with just treating the office with a modicum of dignity, and speaking intelligently about complex subjects.

   Many are looking forward to that.   

[laylalex 7,300]

It seems to me like the only people who actually care what Hillary says these days are people who are not in the Democratic Party.

 

#nooneisstillwithherexceptBillbecausehesignedupforitanddivorcewouldbereallyexpensiveatthispoint

[Boiler 46,086]

She is irrelevant.

Mind you I expect to be hanging around scowling tomorrow.