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

Page 123 - 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
29,008
136
Something about our lord and savior but I couldn’t tell if he was in favor of or opposed to Jesus. He was real excited like about it though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
32,565
15,449
136
Ted Bundycruz-something has words as well.... bundy cause lady justice is getting rapekilled again.


How many GOP critters are spewing Russian Intelligence propaganda/conspiracy theories now? All of them?

@tedcruz
Except the president didn’t investigate corruption, he asked a foreign country to. More specifically he only asked them to look at something that involves his political rival and he didn’t even care if there was an investigation only that there was an announcement.
 

sportage

Lifer
Feb 1, 2008
11,492
3,161
136
MEANWHILE, OVER AT FOX NEWS.....

Fox is running some crap about Hillary being sued, and choosing not air any of the democrats side of the impeachment happening tonight. I guess Fox is afraid their audience might hear something that Donald Trump does not want his people to hear.
GAWD.... talk about drinking the kool-aid.

WOW, just WOW
I can't believe any person with a brain and not on life-support would want to simply stick their head in the sand.
I know we all have opinions and one side vs the other side, but THIS?
This is like paying to attend the best college then spending every class texting on your phone with your headset in your ears.
Just how dumb do you want to be, Fox News viewers?
Just how dumb do you want to be, Trumpies?
Is there some island we can help you get to, as a group, with stupid as your leader?
Because I'm all for finding you that island. ;)
 

brycejones

Lifer
Oct 18, 2005
27,733
26,885
136
@tedcruz
Except the president didn’t investigate corruption, he asked a foreign country to. More specifically he only asked them to look at something that involves his political rival and he didn’t even care if there was an investigation only that there was an announcement.

Well what is Ted going to do when Trump keeps Ted's balls in a jar in the oval office?
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
Ted Bundycruz-something has words as well.... bundy cause lady justice is getting rapekilled again.


How many GOP critters are spewing Russian Intelligence propaganda/conspiracy theories now? All of them?

It's an exercise in the theory of the Big Lie, the preposterous notion that Trump singled out the Bidens for the special ratfucking in order to root out corruption in Ukraine. Anybody who actually believes it is daft.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
@tedcruz
Except the president didn’t investigate corruption, he asked a foreign country to. More specifically he only asked them to look at something that involves his political rival and he didn’t even care if there was an investigation only that there was an announcement.

And when Zelensky wouldn't play along & lie for him, Trump started twisting his arm. Ukraine never wanted anything to do with it as playing for Trump would poison their relationship with Congressional Dems who would obviously see right through it.
 

interchange

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 1999
8,022
2,872
136
Ted Bundycruz-something has words as well.... bundy cause lady justice is getting rapekilled again.


How many GOP critters are spewing Russian Intelligence propaganda/conspiracy theories now? All of them?

Meanwhile it's totally normal to infiltrate a US ambassador's security detail and send texts about opportunities to kill her. Totally normal to obfuscate the withholding of Congressionally approved aid by reassigning the distribution method and making up a lie about the reason the funds were being withheld. Etc. Etc. There is no evidence of corruption here. No need to investigate this, subpoena documents, hear from witnesses, etc.
 
Last edited:

interchange

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 1999
8,022
2,872
136
It's an exercise in the theory of the Big Lie, the preposterous notion that Trump singled out the Bidens for the special ratfucking in order to root out corruption in Ukraine. Anybody who actually believes it is daft.

Let's just make a presumption here which is assuredly false in order to follow a line of reasoning, namely that an investigation into Burisma/Biden would be warranted.

It is quite clear that Trump's actions using his office to influence Zelensky and employing officials within his government to pursue announcement of investigations was subsequent to Guiliani's pursuits in Ukraine. Witnesses and documents produced clearly established that Guiliani was working in Ukraine on behalf of the President personally representing his personal interests and not the office of the President. If we then presume it is ok for that work to become official government foreign policy business, we are sanctioning a mechanism of generating foreign policy that will only ever produce policy that represents a President's personal interests. The whole concept is inherently corrupt and an abuse of power even if what was found had validity and the mechanisms employed were otherwise kosher.
 

Bitek

Lifer
Aug 2, 2001
10,676
5,238
136
I'm not sure how right any of this is. Is the answer to sit on impeachment for what amounts to a year while waiting for the courts to rule on something they likely will not rule on in time for the election? If your goal is messaging to the electorate the message I would get from that is there wasn't anything that important to impeach about because you could afford to wait a year. Second, regardless of the evidence Republican senators aren't going to vote to convict so 'exonerating' him a month before the election seems like a bad idea.

We're seeing we're not waiting around a year with no action.

There have been nearly daily revelations after the impeachment vote. No reason to think the well is dry either.

Even Pelosi's justification for holding the articles was in large part based on trying to get the Senate to call witnesses to allow more evidence collection.
Bolton, Lev, the OMB decision... All of this came within the last month.

The Rs have made a defense that why should they call more witnesses, why isn't the House's investigation job complete?

It's not without merit. It will resonate with voters.

The push to get it out by Christmas doesn't seem to have much logic behind it other than it's a convenient date, and the primaries are about to start.

Was that the right balance? We'll find out soon enough.
The D leadership is accountable for the success of the strategy.
 

dank69

Lifer
Oct 6, 2009
36,207
30,739
136
We're seeing we're not waiting around a year with no action.

There have been nearly daily revelations after the impeachment vote. No reason to think the well is dry either.

Even Pelosi's justification for holding the articles was in large part based on trying to get the Senate to call witnesses to allow more evidence collection.
Bolton, Lev, the OMB decision... All of this came within the last month.

The Rs have made a defense that why should they call more witnesses, why isn't the House's investigation job complete?

It's not without merit. It will resonate with voters.

The push to get it out by Christmas doesn't seem to have much logic behind it other than it's a convenient date, and the primaries are about to start.

Was that the right balance? We'll find out soon enough.
The D leadership is accountable for the success of the strategy.
When it comes to Democrats, there is no right balance. They will be attacked if they do and attacked if they don't. On any issue. Democrats can do no right. Probably because they hate America.
 

cytg111

Lifer
Mar 17, 2008
24,026
13,536
136
I am wondering... for the period Obama had the House... Why didnt he use EP to throw Moscow Mitch in jail on treason charges? Just collude with the House to not formalize impeachment. Job done. I really think the dems dropped the ball on that one.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
We're seeing we're not waiting around a year with no action.

There have been nearly daily revelations after the impeachment vote. No reason to think the well is dry either.

Even Pelosi's justification for holding the articles was in large part based on trying to get the Senate to call witnesses to allow more evidence collection.
Bolton, Lev, the OMB decision... All of this came within the last month.

The Rs have made a defense that why should they call more witnesses, why isn't the House's investigation job complete?

It's not without merit. It will resonate with voters.

The push to get it out by Christmas doesn't seem to have much logic behind it other than it's a convenient date, and the primaries are about to start.

Was that the right balance? We'll find out soon enough.
The D leadership is accountable for the success of the strategy.

Negative. You keep going on as if the truth matters to the GOP. It doesn't. Trump. He's their guy. They're keeping him. Fuck you, Libtards.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

ElFenix

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Mar 20, 2000
102,359
8,456
126

3530-B153-E0-FE-4289-BB9-E-492-E318084-A1.jpg



can i be part of the jew coup crew?
 

interchange

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 1999
8,022
2,872
136
Schiff is on the mark right now. Don't think it makes a lick of difference, but at least he's making it clear the nature of what is going on today and how it fits within the context of our founders.
 

HomerJS

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
36,764
28,977
136
I am wondering... for the period Obama had the House... Why didnt he use EP to throw Moscow Mitch in jail on treason charges? Just collude with the House to not formalize impeachment. Job done. I really think the dems dropped the ball on that one.
Or hold up aid to Israel and force the Mossad to get him a copy of Trump's pee tape before the elections. That's almost the same crime as Trump
 

interchange

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 1999
8,022
2,872
136
This shit works real well when your base are evangelical dolts that live their lives on such broken logic.

To be fair it's not exactly an unreasonable model for how Republicans are viewing Democrats with respect to investigating Biden, for example. Of course, in the case of Trump there is a whole lot of evidence of abuse of power that has been sought and documented. And with Biden despite it being plainly obvious that hiring the VP's son for the board of your company in the midst of a corruption investigation against you is an obvious power play and thus form of corruption, and that Biden getting involved with the firing of Shokin involved the appearance of a possible conflict of interest, there is no evidence whatsoever that any illegal activity or abuse of power occurred connected to these actions which have already been investigated.

Thus, what is important to me is not highlighting the paradigm but rather pointing out that some standard of evidence is what substantiates the need to investigate/prosecute a crime or abuse of power.

All that said, I am bothered that, despite the evidence clearly supporting to my eye a significant abuse of power and obstruction on behalf of the President, that the impeachment proceedings and trial have been approached by the Congress with a foregone conclusion on both sides. While it is totally fine to approach them with an awareness of already established facts obviating a position, it is the duty of a jury to approach eliciting and hearing evidence in a trial without any such presumption -- guilt or innocence.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
85,710
51,000
136
To be fair it's not exactly an unreasonable model for how Republicans are viewing Democrats with respect to investigating Biden, for example. Of course, in the case of Trump there is a whole lot of evidence of abuse of power that has been sought and documented. And with Biden despite it being plainly obvious that hiring the VP's son for the board of your company in the midst of a corruption investigation against you is an obvious power play and thus form of corruption, and that Biden getting involved with the firing of Shokin involved the appearance of a possible conflict of interest, there is no evidence whatsoever that any illegal activity or abuse of power occurred connected to these actions which have already been investigated.

Thus, what is important to me is not highlighting the paradigm but rather pointing out that some standard of evidence is what substantiates the need to investigate/prosecute a crime or abuse of power.

All that said, I am bothered that, despite the evidence clearly supporting to my eye a significant abuse of power and obstruction on behalf of the President, that the impeachment proceedings and trial have been approached by the Congress with a foregone conclusion on both sides. While it is totally fine to approach them with an awareness of already established facts obviating a position, it is the duty of a jury to approach eliciting and hearing evidence in a trial without any such presumption -- guilt or innocence.

I'm not sure how getting Shokin fired is a possible conflict of interest as the reason Biden was trying to get him fired was that he WASN'T investigating Burisma.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

interchange

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 1999
8,022
2,872
136
I'm not sure how getting Shokin fired is a possible conflict of interest as the reason Biden was trying to get him fired was that he WASN'T investigating Burisma.

I said appearance of a possible conflict of interest. Not that there was one. As you correctly point out, looking into it clearly indicates if anything he was putting his son in more risk.