Info PSA- Public impeachments start today- UPDATE 2/5/2020- Trump wins.

Page 109 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

IronWing

No Lifer
Jul 20, 2001
70,266
29,009
136
I'm not mad at all. I feel badly that the country has to go through this and that so many people bought into this whole charade. In actuality, I'm laughing at the politicians like Nana, Schiff, Nadler and the Democratic house. I'm laughing all the way to the next election, where I believe the results of all this will be revealed in the most devastating ways for the Democrats. There is going to be a revolt and the people will show their hand on election day.
Have you not one ounce of self respect left?
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
85,710
51,001
136
Sorry, while that may be, your posts and others here reek of desperation, of people who know they are losing the battle. The democrats have been plotting to remove this president since day one. The media have been working in collusion with them, becoming an arm of the Democratic party, and activists toward that end. People like you have bought right in. The result is irreparable damage and division. Pelosi has said they have been working on this for 2 1/2 years, so this never was about Ukraine, but about hate for this president and their quest to destroy the presidency. This has been a highly organized coup attempt. I hope everyone involved gets their just desserts.

You seem really angry that the House is doing its duty to police misconduct by the executive branch. Remember, Trump is trying to rig an election here, surely you don't want presidents to be able to rig elections, do you?

Remember, Pelosi is protecting you from Trump. It's the mark of a responsible person that she's willing to stand up and protect you and our Constitution even while you talk shit at her for doing it. Someday you'll thank her.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
85,710
51,001
136
I'm not mad at all. I feel badly that the country has to go through this and that so many people bought into this whole charade. In actuality, I'm laughing at the politicians like Nana, Schiff, Nadler and the Democratic house. I'm laughing all the way to the next election, where I believe the results of all this will be revealed in the most devastating ways for the Democrats. There is going to be a revolt and the people will show their hand on election day.

Remember how you were predicting exactly the same thing on the day before the 2018 midterms only to see the Republicans routed in one of the largest midterm defeats in modern history?

Did that cause you to rethink your position any?
 

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
111,165
30,117
146
Have you not one ounce of self respect left?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
 
  • Like
Reactions: [DHT]Osiris

[DHT]Osiris

Lifer
Dec 15, 2015
15,362
13,688
146
Remember how you were predicting exactly the same thing on the day before the 2018 midterms only to see the Republicans routed in one of the largest midterm defeats in modern history?

Did that cause you to rethink your position any?
Waitwaitwait, here comes the part where he explains that the 2018 midterms was actually good for Republicans.
1576782355402.png
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,266
126
Bullshit. Pelosi is not only trying to negate the results of the last election, but control the results of the next one. It's not gonna work. The Democrats have pretty much guaranteed his reelection. I have no doubt that when Trump is acquitted in the Senate, the house will impeach again, except, should they lose control of the House and not regain control of the Senate in 2020, Pelosi obviously will no longer be speaker and they can't do that anymore. Even in that they will probably keep introducing articles, but they won't pass in the House.

Fuck Pelosi and the rest of her fucktard cabal.

Trump will win and the House won't impeach. What you fail to understand is that you nor any Trumpette can vote twice. Everyone else sees Mitch laughing at the Constitutional process with an announced verdict ahead of the trial. So be it. Nancy denies them a farcical acquittal.

Guaranteed victory for Trump? Maybe you should have a look at his base which is a minority and the numbers guarantee a win if the anti-Trump side is energized and you are giving them a splendid example of fictional diatribe without supporting facts that does just that. Pelosi has the right to impeach again, pass this on as is and let you win or deny you, Trump and Mitch.

Impotence, railing, weeping and gnashing of teeth. This is what you have for the moment. It probably doesn't taste very good to you and yours.
 

NWRMidnight

Diamond Member
Jun 18, 2001
3,048
2,654
136
Piglosi can fuck around and delay sending the impeachment to the Senate til the cows come home, but her power ends in the House. She doesn't get to establish the Senate rules for this trial, as much as she'd like to. The Senate has the sole power to try all impeachments. Article I, Clause 6: "the Senate has exclusive and unreviewable authority to determine what constitutes an adequate impeachment trial"

Turn the Articles in to the Senate and let them do their job, then let's move on.
That's just it, they refuse to do their job and violate their oath of office. So how will letting them have the articles allow them to do a job they are refusing to do fairly, morally and properly?

But it sounds like your ok with all that.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
85,710
51,001
136
Waitwaitwait, here comes the part where he explains that the 2018 midterms was actually good for Republicans.
View attachment 14667

I like how he went from predicting that Republicans would win the 2018 election due to a silent majority and increasing black and hispanic votes for Republicans to predicting Republicans would win the 2020 election due to a silent majority and increasing black and hispanic votes for Republicans.

The total failure of his prediction in 2018 apparently had exactly zero effect on his prediction for 2020.
 
  • Like
Reactions: [DHT]Osiris

VashHT

Diamond Member
Feb 1, 2007
3,128
987
136
I'm not understand the whole impeach to negate the election thing. Republicans know that Hilary won't become president if Trump is removed right? Or do they think democrats really want president Pence or something?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fanatical Meat

NWRMidnight

Diamond Member
Jun 18, 2001
3,048
2,654
136
The Supreme Court has no jurisdiction for impeachments and the Constitution prohibits them from interfering.
Really, then why are there numerous cases in the courts tied to the impeachment?

Don't get me wrong, what you stated is correct, but that part of the Constitution is already void as they are already interfering.
 

[DHT]Osiris

Lifer
Dec 15, 2015
15,362
13,688
146
I'm not understand the whole impeach to negate the election thing. Republicans know that Hilary won't become president if Trump is removed right? Or do they think democrats really want president Pence or something?
It's an idiotic attempt at casting a poor light on the impeachment, utilized since Trump's defenders ran out of defensive ammunition.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,266
126
Really, then why are there numerous cases in the courts tied to the impeachment?

Don't get me wrong, what you stated is correct, but that part of the Constitution is already void as they are already interfering.

The violations if the Constitution in defiance to the powers of the House is why there is court involvement, but in the actual impeachment process the SCOTUS has no business outside of the Chief Justice presiding in the Senate. The SCOTUS can't demand Pelosi give the Senate anything as an example.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
85,710
51,001
136
Really, then why are there numerous cases in the courts tied to the impeachment?

Don't get me wrong, what you stated is correct, but that part of the Constitution is already void as they are already interfering.

None of the cases are about impeachment, they are about subpoena powers. The courts have jurisdiction over whether subpoenas are valid or not but the actual process of impeachment is entirely outside of their authority.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
I'm not mad at all. I feel badly that the country has to go through this and that so many people bought into this whole charade. In actuality, I'm laughing at the politicians like Nana, Schiff, Nadler and the Democratic house. I'm laughing all the way to the next election, where I believe the results of all this will be revealed in the most devastating ways for the Democrats. There is going to be a revolt and the people will show their hand on election day.

Sweet, sweet delusion & denial. Maybe you can explain why Trump has forbidden testimony from his closest advisors & how that's not obstruction of Congress. Surely they could exonerate Trump, couldn't they? Why won't he let them? Why won't McConnell?
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
85,710
51,001
136
I'm not understand the whole impeach to negate the election thing. Republicans know that Hilary won't become president if Trump is removed right? Or do they think democrats really want president Pence or something?

Well it would be negating the election by removing the person elected from the position they were elected to.

Of course that is literally the entire reason impeachment was put into the Constitution so saying 'you guys are using this constitutional power for its intended purpose!' seems like a pretty dumb argument.
 
  • Like
Reactions: zinfamous

[DHT]Osiris

Lifer
Dec 15, 2015
15,362
13,688
146
Well it would be negating the election by removing the person elected from the position they were elected to.
That isn't negating an election though. We don't go back in time, we don't undo all his actions/redo all his undo's. We don't strike from the record that he was President. He just has (Impeached) after his name now, and if the Senate convicts, we have a lame duck President Pence for another year.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
85,710
51,001
136
Sweet, sweet delusion & denial. Maybe you can explain why Trump has forbidden testimony from his closest advisors & how that's not obstruction of Congress. Surely they could exonerate Trump, couldn't they? Why won't he let them? Why won't McConnell?

It's really unfortunate for Trump that he has all this staff ready, willing, and able to totally exonerate him but he's not able to do so because of his strong commitment to preserving norms around presidential executive privilege. Who would have thought that he's such a strong institutionalist?
 

nakedfrog

No Lifer
Apr 3, 2001
59,303
13,916
136
Trump is completely innocent. That's why they're already announcing they don't intend to have a fair trial. Makes perfect sense? Somehow? Uh... right, guys?
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
Well it would be negating the election by removing the person elected from the position they were elected to.

Of course that is literally the entire reason impeachment was put into the Constitution so saying 'you guys are using this constitutional power for its intended purpose!' seems like a pretty dumb argument.

Yeh, but they're appealing to people who've been dumbed down by the absorption of way too much Trump/Russian/GOP propaganda & misinformation. They couldn't think straight if they wanted to.
 

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
111,165
30,117
146
It's very easy, everybody:

Trump can prove his innocence in court with public testimony. His closest advisers and all of those involved in the "not a crime" can do so as well.

But Trump won't do it. It's all he needs to do to exonerate himself, but he won't do it. The only one stopping this is himself and Mitch. That's it. No one else. The House has maintained an open seat, all along, for Trump to exonerate himself.

Why doesn't a single GOP ass-licker on these boards ever ask the simplest fucking question: why won't Trump do the one thing he can do to prove that he did not crime? Why?
 

hal2kilo

Lifer
Feb 24, 2009
24,277
10,935
136
Remember what
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
You are in trouble now. :)
 

VashHT

Diamond Member
Feb 1, 2007
3,128
987
136
Well it would be negating the election by removing the person elected from the position they were elected to.

Of course that is literally the entire reason impeachment was put into the Constitution so saying 'you guys are using this constitutional power for its intended purpose!' seems like a pretty dumb argument.
Yeah but Pence was elected on the same ticket, you're not really negating the election if the guy who was also elected with Trump takes over imo.