Quantcast

Pesqueeb

bicycle in airplane hangar
Feb 2, 2007
40,293
16,727
Riding the baggage carousel.
Holy balls, Wenstrup gave Hill an actual chance to talk and boy oh boy, does he look like he regrets it. :rofl: I can't wait till someone on the internet posts that picture.

Edit: My mistake; Schiff asked Hill if she'd like to respond to Wenstrup. Of course he didn't want to hear her talk. Republicans REALLY are scared of women. Especially smart women.
 
Last edited:

Westy

the teste
Nov 22, 2002
54,394
20,184
Sleazattle
Holy balls, Wenstrup gave Hill an actual chance to talk and boy oh boy, does he look like he regrets it. :rofl: I can't wait till someone on the internet posts that picture.

Edit: My mistake; Schiff asked Hill if she'd like to respond to Wenstrup. Of course he didn't want to hear her talk. Republicans REALLY are scared of women. Especially smart women.
Just a career civil servant sucking the government teet
 

Nick

My name is Nick
Sep 21, 2001
24,023
14,631
where the trails are
the repeated comments (earlier) that EVERYONE knew what was going on are going to be hard to counter, unless of course all of those not complying with subpoenas would like to provide testimony under oath.

there will be ZERO good reasons why they should NOT take an oath and testify.
 

AngryMetalsmith

Business is good, thanks for asking
Jun 4, 2006
21,210
10,009
I have no idea where I am
Oh my, how quickly the Republicans have forgotten that they marked Obama as a failure before he was even inaugurated and refused to work with him setting the us on a course of perpetual obstructionism. And yet here they are whining about how Dems don't worship dear leader and treat him so unfairly. So rich.
 

Pesqueeb

bicycle in airplane hangar
Feb 2, 2007
40,293
16,727
Riding the baggage carousel.
Oh my, how quickly the Republicans have forgotten that they marked Obama as a failure before he was even inaugurated and refused to work with him setting the us on a course of perpetual obstructionism. And yet here they are whining about how Dems don't worship dear leader and treat him so unfairly. So rich.
I'm not convinced that Nunes and Brian aren't the same person. Has anyone ever seen them in the same room at the same time?
 
Last edited:

Brian HCM#1

MMMMMMMMM BEER!!!!!!!!!!
Sep 7, 2001
32,119
378
Bay Area, California
I'm almost 100% positive the house will vote to impeach and of course win. Problem is it will go to the senate. The Republicans will drag it out as long as possible to make sure several senators miss some important debates, as all senators are required to be present at all times during these hearings. When all is said & done, impeachment goes nowhere & Trump wins in 2020 because the left only focused on one thing in 2019.
 

velocipedist

Lubrication Sensei
Jul 11, 2006
559
702
Rainbow City Alabama
Actually there is no requirement for all 100 senators to be present, as long as 51 were the 2/3 threshold would be met by 34 votes.

https://www.washingtonian.com/2019/10/10/the-impeachment-loophole-no-ones-talking-about/

Unfortunately, I do agree with your scenario of how the trial will go in the senate. My worry is if not now when? It is congresses constitutional duty to follow the evidence and vote on articles of impeachment. And given the amount of evidence currently available most impartial parties should view impeachment as a necessary process regardless of its outcome. Anything less is a failure of congress to uphold their oath to the country and constitution.

The next executive may not be as blatant in their criming and if congress failed to to pursue an impeachment that would set a horrible precident.

The current situation has nothing to do with the results of the 2016 election and everything to do with the current presidents actions while in office.

I'm almost 100% positive the house will vote to impeach and of course win. Problem is it will go to the senate. The Republicans will drag it out as long as possible to make sure several senators miss some important debates, as all senators are required to be present at all times during these hearings. When all is said & done, impeachment goes nowhere & Trump wins in 2020 because the left only focused on one thing in 2019.
 

Pesqueeb

bicycle in airplane hangar
Feb 2, 2007
40,293
16,727
Riding the baggage carousel.
I'm almost 100% positive the house will vote to impeach and of course win. Problem is it will go to the senate. The Republicans will drag it out as long as possible to make sure several senators miss some important debates, as all senators are required to be present at all times during these hearings. When all is said & done, impeachment goes nowhere & Trump wins in 2020 because the left only focused on one thing in 2019.
A Narcissist's Prayer

That didn't happen.

And if it did, it wasn't that bad.

And if it was, that's not a big deal.

And if it is, that's not my fault.

And if it was, I didn't mean it.

And if I did...

You deserved it.
<------ You are here
 

Brian HCM#1

MMMMMMMMM BEER!!!!!!!!!!
Sep 7, 2001
32,119
378
Bay Area, California
Actually there is no requirement for all 100 senators to be present, as long as 51 were the 2/3 threshold would be met by 34 votes.

https://www.washingtonian.com/2019/10/10/the-impeachment-loophole-no-ones-talking-about/

Unfortunately, I do agree with your scenario of how the trial will go in the senate. My worry is if not now when? It is congresses constitutional duty to follow the evidence and vote on articles of impeachment. And given the amount of evidence currently available most impartial parties should view impeachment as a necessary process regardless of its outcome. Anything less is a failure of congress to uphold their oath to the country and constitution.

The next executive may not be as blatant in their criming and if congress failed to to pursue an impeachment that would set a horrible precident.

The current situation has nothing to do with the results of the 2016 election and everything to do with the current presidents actions while in office.
Agreed, this has nothing to do with 2016, Mueller showed that after the left was convinced they did. Anyways, is hearsay enough to impeach a president? The left will tell you yes, the right no. Its all partisan in this matter. I don't believe any Republicans will drift left. I think 2 Democrats voted against impeachment, but it will more than likely stay the same. Anyways, Mueller cost the tax payers $40M and I hate to see how much this latest stunt has cost us. At the end of the day 2019 will go down as the house accomplished nothing other than trying to impeach Trump. The sad thing is IMO Trump would be willing to sit down with Pelosi and work out bills to benefit all Americans if her primary interest was to help the country. However removing Trump is first, foremost & only her motive. 2020 election will sure be an interesting one to say the least.
 

Pesqueeb

bicycle in airplane hangar
Feb 2, 2007
40,293
16,727
Riding the baggage carousel.
Unfortunately, I do agree with your scenario of how the trial will go in the senate. My worry is if not now when? It is congresses constitutional duty to follow the evidence and vote on articles of impeachment. And given the amount of evidence currently available most impartial parties should view impeachment as a necessary process regardless of its outcome. Anything less is a failure of congress to uphold their oath to the country and constitution.

The next executive may not be as blatant in their criming and if congress failed to to pursue an impeachment that would set a horrible precident.

The current situation has nothing to do with the results of the 2016 election and everything to do with the current presidents actions while in office.
I take a somewhat middling view.

I agree that, if taken today, the Senate would not convict Trump. @jonKranked and I discussed at some length this morning some talk about how a "anonymous vote" might lead to a conviction but that an on the record vote most likely will not. Not withstanding how incredibly chickenshit this shows the GOP to be, it is, at least in my view, a symptom of just how cancerous the modern GOP is. "We'd vote him out but we're afraid". Party before country, feckless, goldbricking, pussies. Scared of doing what they privately say they think is actually right, to appease the mouth breather base that vote for them, who got called from beneath the rocks by some sort of Russian backed, bigoted pied piper, at the end of 2015 because they don't want to lose being a "career civil servant sucking the government teat".

Where I disagree, is that when a vote is held, I do not believe that it inevitably leads to reelection. Trumps record of election "winning" since his own election is abysmal. A solid majority of mid term, off season, and/or special elections have gone against the GOP. It's been a bloodbath. The trend does not bode well for trump. Anything is possible of course, especially if fuckery is afoot again, but I want the Republicans, especially senate republicans, to have to run campaigns with the albatross of public records of voting against impeaching Donald Trump. The ads write themselves. That is going to be a pretty heavy anchor for them to drag across any electoral finish line.
 

Brian HCM#1

MMMMMMMMM BEER!!!!!!!!!!
Sep 7, 2001
32,119
378
Bay Area, California
I take a somewhat middling view.

I agree that, if taken today, the Senate would not convict Trump. @jonKranked and I discussed at some length this morning some talk about how a "anonymous vote" might lead to a conviction but that an on the record vote most likely will not. Not withstanding how incredibly chickenshit this shows the GOP to be, it is, at least in my view, a symptom of just how cancerous the modern GOP is. "We'd vote him out but we're afraid". Party before country, feckless, goldbricking, pussies. Scared of doing what they privately say they think is actually right, to appease the mouth breather base that vote for them, who got called from beneath the rocks by some sort of Russian backed, bigoted pied piper, at the end of 2015 because they don't want to lose being a "career civil servant sucking the government teat".

Where I disagree, is that when a vote is held, I do not believe that it inevitably leads to reelection. Trumps record of election "winning" since his own election is abysmal. A solid majority of mid term, off season, and/or special elections have gone against the GOP. It's been a bloodbath. The trend does not bode well for trump. Anything is possible of course, especially if fuckery is afoot again, but I want the Republicans, especially senate republicans, to have to run campaigns with the albatross of public records of voting against impeaching Donald Trump. The ads write themselves. That is going to be a pretty heavy anchor for them to drag across any electoral finish line.
I don't think the Democrats have a strong enough candidate. Warren & Sanders are way too left for the moderates forcing voters to go independent. Biden is middle of the road, but his gears are slipping pretty bad which may hurt him. One person if he can score the nomination and I think would have a good legit shot is Mayor Pete.
 

velocipedist

Lubrication Sensei
Jul 11, 2006
559
702
Rainbow City Alabama
Except it is not hearsay when it is based on the president's own words in the "transcript" he provided and further confirmed through direct testimony of career civil servants that were on the call.

As for Mueller his investigation clearly revealed that Russia actively hacked the 2016 election to the benefit of Trump. Moreover he showed 10 instances of obstruction of justice that likely would have been charged were it not for the OLC memo limiting the scope of his duties and why his report focused on the counter intelligence issues more than anything else.

Conspiracy was not proven, and collusion is not a defined legal term, but upon reading the entirety of the Mueller Report it begs credulence to argue against the fact that Trump et al were "useful idiots" to Russia at a bare minimum.

Agreed, this has nothing to do with 2016, Mueller showed that after the left was convinced they did. Anyways, is hearsay enough to impeach a president? The left will tell you yes, the right no. Its all partisan in this matter. I don't believe any Republicans will drift left. I think 2 Democrats voted against impeachment, but it will more than likely stay the same. Anyways, Mueller cost the tax payers $40M and I hate to see how much this latest stunt has cost us. At the end of the day 2019 will go down as the house accomplished nothing other than trying to impeach Trump. The sad thing is IMO Trump would be willing to sit down with Pelosi and work out bills to benefit all Americans if her primary interest was to help the country. However removing Trump is first, foremost & only her motive. 2020 election will sure be an interesting one to say the least.
 

velocipedist

Lubrication Sensei
Jul 11, 2006
559
702
Rainbow City Alabama
Indeed, I do not think impeachment will hurt Democrats ability to defeat him in November. If anything history shows us that the Clinton impeachment led to the rise of the Tea Party GOP.

So I can naively hope for a comparable progressive wave after this impeachment as the somatic masses are woken to the reality that policies that help the top percent of our society do nothing but perpetuate our rather broken system of I got mine (through my boot straps as it were) and everyone else simply needs to try harder.

I take a somewhat middling view.

I agree that, if taken today, the Senate would not convict Trump. @jonKranked and I discussed at some length this morning some talk about how a "anonymous vote" might lead to a conviction but that an on the record vote most likely will not. Not withstanding how incredibly chickenshit this shows the GOP to be, it is, at least in my view, a symptom of just how cancerous the modern GOP is. "We'd vote him out but we're afraid". Party before country, feckless, goldbricking, pussies. Scared of doing what they privately say they think is actually right, to appease the mouth breather base that vote for them, who got called from beneath the rocks by some sort of Russian backed, bigoted pied piper, at the end of 2015 because they don't want to lose being a "career civil servant sucking the government teat".

Where I disagree, is that when a vote is held, I do not believe that it inevitably leads to reelection. Trumps record of election "winning" since his own election is abysmal. A solid majority of mid term, off season, and/or special elections have gone against the GOP. It's been a bloodbath. The trend does not bode well for trump. Anything is possible of course, especially if fuckery is afoot again, but I want the Republicans, especially senate republicans, to have to run campaigns with the albatross of public records of voting against impeaching Donald Trump. The ads write themselves. That is going to be a pretty heavy anchor for them to drag across any electoral finish line.
 

jonKranked

Detective Dookie
Nov 10, 2005
85,840
24,423
media blackout
I take a somewhat middling view.

I agree that, if taken today, the Senate would not convict Trump. @jonKranked and I discussed at some length this morning some talk about how a "anonymous vote" might lead to a conviction but that an on the record vote most likely will not. Not withstanding how incredibly chickenshit this shows the GOP to be, it is, at least in my view, a symptom of just how cancerous the modern GOP is. "We'd vote him out but we're afraid". Party before country, feckless, goldbricking, pussies. Scared of doing what they privately say they think is actually right, to appease the mouth breather base that vote for them, who got called from beneath the rocks by some sort of Russian backed, bigoted pied piper, at the end of 2015 because they don't want to lose being a "career civil servant sucking the government teat".

Where I disagree, is that when a vote is held, I do not believe that it inevitably leads to reelection. Trumps record of election "winning" since his own election is abysmal. A solid majority of mid term, off season, and/or special elections have gone against the GOP. It's been a bloodbath. The trend does not bode well for trump. Anything is possible of course, especially if fuckery is afoot again, but I want the Republicans, especially senate republicans, to have to run campaigns with the albatross of public records of voting against impeaching Donald Trump. The ads write themselves. That is going to be a pretty heavy anchor for them to drag across any electoral finish line.
i was discussing this with a buddy last night and an option we hadn't discussed came up. the removal vote required at a senate trial requires 2/3 majority of those present. Assuming all D's are present and vote in favor and no R's join them, only 70 senators would need to be present to hit the 2/3. it's a possibility that some R's would skip the vote as a means of not having to put themselves on the record either way.