Impeachment part deux

No comment except to say it's worth watching/listening to a chunk of it.  It's worth knowing what the "jurors" of the Senate are voting for or against--and it's right there for all to see. 

hodad said:

No comment except to say it's worth watching/listening to a chunk of it.  It's worth knowing what the "jurors" of the Senate are voting for or against--and it's right there for all to see.

Click to expand...

Yeah but freedom.

Ricardus said:

Yeah but freedom.

Click to expand...

...to actually have your vote counted amd not thrown away. Voting should be compulsory as it is in Australia.

hodad said:

No comment except to say it's worth watching/listening to a chunk of it.  It's worth knowing what the "jurors" of the Senate are voting for or against--and it's right there for all to see.

Click to expand...

It’s been interesting.  Of course then again every time this happens it’s interesting.

pucho812 said:

every time this happens it’s interesting.

Click to expand...

I'm glad to see you're checking it out. 

I worry that many on the right side are paying as little attention as some Republican Senators seem to be--ignore the actual arguments, and seek solace in a soundbite from Ted Cruz or Tucker Carlson on Fox, or an editorial in the WSJ.  They get some pre-judged response from conservative media or politicians and pretend they know everything about it rather than taking the time to listen and watch and pass judgment themselves. 

People have the opportunity to decide for themselves.  It's all right there to see--we can get the same info Senators get, and while our decision on Trump's guilt or innocence doesn't have the weight of the Senators', it can help us decide which  politicians or parties we might wish to support or oppose in the future, and what sort of behavior and actions we might want to see from the politicians who represent us. 

It seems a shame not to take advantage of that opportunity.

It would be a shame to miss it.

[quote author =iturnknobs link=topic=76963.msg979061#msg979061 date=1612996116]
Voting should be compulsory as it is in Australia.
[/quote]
THis should only be allowed if you have the option to abstain. I am not interested in voting for the lesser of two weevils.

Cheers

Ian

ruffrecords said:

THis should only be allowed if you have the option to abstain. I am not interested in voting for the lesser of two weevils.

Cheers

Ian

Click to expand...

The lesser of two weevils is still weevil

ruffrecords said:

THis should only be allowed if you have the option to abstain. I am not interested in voting for the lesser of two weevils.

Click to expand...

Haha  
I'm abstaining from watching the impeachment, I allot no more than 10 minutes at the end of the day to read the bullet points.
I haven't liked myself when I've gotten worked up recently with what is happening in politics.  I maybe got mad or was rude to someone that I actually like and, for what?

P&L



 

can you imagine doing time in the name of the rumpster, that would be aggravating, to be manipulated into hell by that fool, sheesh, i would feel like such an idiot after i woke up to reality,

CJ said:

can you imagine doing time in the name of the rumpster, that would be aggravating, to be manipulated into hell by that fool, sheesh, i would feel like such an idiot after i woke up to reality,

Click to expand...

The number of these individuals will not be high enough to prevent this type of atrocity from happening again. After all, the many of the senators that the Republicans put in office didn't even have the decency to be present at a hearing for an event that ended in injuries and death for Capitol officers. Lack of consequences will only enable this behavior. Silence is cooperation. Stand tall, Republicans. If you're not disgusted, you're disgusting. Law and order.

ruffrecords said:

THis should only be allowed if you have the option to abstain. I am not interested in voting for the lesser of two weevils.

Cheers

Ian

Click to expand...

I understand your sentiment, but our country would not have ended up with Trump if this were the case. We have a documentable voter suppression issue in our country... and an UNDOCUMENTABLE voter fraud issue.

An interesting point that I didn't originally make:
The defense lawyers' argument:Trump's supporters on Jan. 6th were not controlled by Trump.
The reason most GOP Senators will support this argument:  They fear (or in a few cases relish) the control Trump has over his supporters. 

Their motivation for supporting Trump actually bolsters the case against Trump. 

I really wonder what good  the Republicans see in acquitting Trump.  Sure, it keeps Trump's more violent supporters from harassing or even attacking them--but doesn't that concern actually speak to Trump's guilt? 

Do they really want to keep as the nominal leader of their party a man who was willing to put their lives in harm's way to satisfy his own narcissistic, anti-democratic whims?  Do they really want, by acquitting him, to open the door to similar actions by a future leader? 

Do they really believe that granting Trump plausible deniability on the slimmest of actual evidence is the right course of action for their party or for their country? 

I don't mean to sound too bombastic, but I don't understand how anyone can justify supporting acquittal while supporting the American system of government.  The only justification, such as it is, is that one has been brainwashed by Trump's narcissistic blathering into believing, against all evidence, that the election really was stolen.
Now, I am sorry that people have fallen for Trump's narcissistic delusions.  It's a sad thing.  But a Republican acquittal would do nothing more than encourage the crazy that Trump has propagated.  That does not help those who are deluded, it doesn't help our nation, and in the long run I think it's unhealthy for the GOP. 

EDIT:  Georgia's ugliest personality, Marjorie Taylor Greene, recently called the GOP Donald Trump's party.  So when, exactly did Republicans decide their party belonged to one man?  When did an entire party become subservient to the whims of a single bloviating narcissist?  And more:  is that really what Republicans want their party to be? 

I never saw a reason to find him guilty. Aside from the fact it was pretty much unconstitutional, I really saw no connection in what he said vs what they did.
While some celebrate this and others are mad.  Let’s relish in the fact that ultimately they tried to impeach a private citizen and if they can come after him there is nothing to stop them coming after you. Luckily they didn’t get him.

pucho812 said:

I really saw no connection in what he said vs what they did.

Click to expand...

1.  Trump changed the date of the rally to coincide with the certification of the electors.

2.  Trump invited the electors to march on the Capitol, even though the rally permit expressly disallowed it. 

3. Trump invited his most vile, brainwashed supporters to come to DC for a "wild time."

4.  Trump  used the word "fight" repeatedly, and stated that his loss essentially marked the death of the country. 

5.  Trump's supporters had repeatedly been moved to violence by his words.  He made know effort to acknowledge or counteract that, aside from using the word "peacefully" once. 

6.  Trump consistently lied about the supposed theft of the election--from months before the election all the way to the present day.  He chummed the water for months before setting his sharks loose on the Capitol. 

No evidence of a connection whatsoever.

Even Mitch McConnell said the rioters “did this because they had been fed wild falsehoods by the most powerful man on Earth.”  While I find McConnell's vote to acquit contemptible, I can't say I disagree with him on this point.

hodad said:

1.  Trump changed the date of the rally to coincide with the certification of the electors.

2.  Trump invited the electors to march on the Capitol, even though the rally permit expressly disallowed it. 

3. Trump invited his most vile, brainwashed supporters to come to DC for a "wild time."

4.  Trump  used the word "fight" repeatedly, and stated that his loss essentially marked the death of the country. 

5.  Trump's supporters had repeatedly been moved to violence by his words.  He made know effort to acknowledge or counteract that, aside from using the word "peacefully" once. 

6.  Trump consistently lied about the supposed theft of the election--from months before the election all the way to the present day.  He chummed the water for months before setting his sharks loose on the Capitol. 

No evidence of a connection whatsoever.

Even Mitch McConnell said the rioters “did this because they had been fed wild falsehoods by the most powerful man on Earth.”  While I find McConnell's vote to acquit contemptible, I can't say I disagree with him on this point.

Click to expand...

If you use his words as a benchmark for impeachment, then there are a lot of others in congress who should be in  the cue for that.

pucho812 said:

If you use his words as a benchmark for impeachment, then there are a lot of others in congress who should be in  the cue for that.

Click to expand...

Oh, yes, every one of them that incited an insurrection.  And that would be.........exactly zero.  That excuse was weak when Trump's impeachment lawyers repeated it ad infinitum, and it's still just as weak. 

There's a difference between saying "fight" when you're exhorting your supporters to vote, versus when you have supporters who have already committed violence in your name.