• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Impeachment coming

Page 53 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Now that I think about it. What the prosecutors should do is use the witness testimony to hammer home how terroristic these actions were and how craven the Republicans who trying to downplay them. No pointless hogging of the limelight in the quixotic belief that sufficiently dramatic Perry-Mason-style courtroom theatrics might enable those Republicans to grow a spine and vote to convict. That won’t happen.

The prosecution should do its job thoroughly, and get this criminality nailed down for the historical record. Without any desperate contortions to force Republicans into recognizing their constitutional duty. They’re not going to.

For example: Sen. Ron Johnson, (Q)Wisconsin, said the push for witnesses will “further inflame the situation”

Oh goodness! We would not want to “further inflame” things beyond a president and his cohorts sending a mob to the Capitol Building to kill the Vice President and stop the counting of Electoral Votes. He’s parroting the well-established GOP talking point that any attempt at accountability = divisive.
 
IronWing said:
What's a bit of light treason between friends? Let's be sure to name names: Mark Finchem.
Click to expand...
And Republican Becky Nutt, chair of the Arizona legislative Ethics Committee, dismissed all ethics complaints against Finchem with no investigation because participating in insurrection is protected speech. The Party of Lincoln has come a long way.
 
NWRMidnight said:
As I said earlier, McConnell needs to be impeached himself, as he is the one who postponed the trial till after Trump left office by stating he would not call the Senate back without 100% agreement. Which is why Nancy did not send the articles to the Senate. He admitted today that he is going to acquit Trump on grounds that it is unconstitutional. And he put it in a letter..

www.politico.com

McConnell reveals he will vote to acquit Trump

His announcement ends a long period of silence over whether he would consider convicting Trump.
www.politico.com www.politico.com
Click to expand...

I cannot wait to piss on traitor McConnell's grave. What an absolute piece of shit.
 
IronWing said:
And Republican Becky Nutt, chair of the Arizona legislative Ethics Committee, dismissed all ethics complaints against Finchem with no investigation because participating in insurrection is protected speech. The Party of Lincoln has come a long way.
Click to expand...

When they say they are the party of Lincoln, I think they mean they are the party that supported the assassination of Lincoln. They probably shortened the phrase to make it easier to say. After all they do support the confederacy, they do support the killing of their political enemies, and racism isn’t really that big of a deal for them. Honestly it makes perfect sense.
 
Just yesterday the repugs criticized the dems' case for using news clippings instead of traditional forms of evidence, and now today the dems want to call a witness and they're going apeshit. I'm so tired of the repugs and their "heads I win, tails you lose" bullshit. The dems should do whatever they think is appropriate.
 
OK. So everyone's agreed on accepting the congress woman's testimony as evidence. And not so unsurprisingly the former president's counsel agreed and had no plans to call anyone. Why fight when you aren't getting paid anyway and you know that the Senate's going to favor your client.
 
If the dems where weak, they would have not even held the impeachment knowing that the Republican's had already decided their vote before it started. If you have been paying attention, the GOP where basically saying they will drag this out to the middle of March. So, is it weakness, or is their a bigger picture since the vote has been decided before the trial?

You know, like all the work that has to be done to get this country back on the right track and to undo the damage Trump has done, not to mention a Stimulus package to help the citizens. What do you believe the impact of dragging the impeachment till middle of March have on helping the citizen's of the United States?
 
Last edited:
NWRMidnight said:
If the dems where weak, they would have not even held the impeachment knowing that the Republican's had already decided their vote before it started. If you have been paying attention, the GOP where basically saying they will drag this out to the middle of March. So, is it weakness, or is their a bigger picture since the vote has been decided before the trial?

You know, like all the work that has to be done to get this country back on the right track and to undo the damage Trump has done, not to mention a Stimulus package to help the citizens. What do you believe the impact of dragging the impeachment till middle of March have on helping the citizen's of the United States?
Click to expand...
It wouldn't drag on that long.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top