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

Page 75 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
It's very striking how different Democrats and Republicans fight for their goals. Had the tables been turned, they would have strung it all to the election and voted right before it in the House if they couldn't enforce the subpoenas, and/or they would have attempted to use inherent contempt. Democrats? Let's just drop it all!

IAOR5DMCPJFT3FWHV2HEAC5YFQ.jpg

That's bullshit. Dems aren't dropping anything. We're taking the fight to the Senate.
 

sportage

Lifer
Feb 1, 2008
11,492
3,161
136
Well, if Hillary had been elected in 2016, we'd be right where we find ourself today.
Except, it would be Hillary being impeached by republicans and democrats claiming the republicans were wasting their time over nothing.

Key Mueller witness charged with funneling contributions to Clinton campaign

Democrats would be saying the exact same thing with defending Hillary as republicans are now saying with defending Donald Trump.
Republicans would be claiming outrage and shock at what Hillary had done while democrats would be claiming impeaching Hillary was only some phony baloney republican stunt.
Republicans would be claiming the US Constitution was in jeopardy if Hillary were not held accountable.
Democrats would be claiming Hillary had broke no laws, no high crimes and misdemeanors, no smoking guns.
Everything happening today would be exactly the same except the rolls would be switched.
And believe me.... republicans definitely would be impeaching Hillary over the news linked above.
 
Last edited:

Maxima1

Diamond Member
Jan 15, 2013
3,538
759
146
Because a president that abuses his power and is willing to use his power to help ensure his re-election is a direct threat to our democracy. Stringing it out to win elections would mean putting their party before the country. Democrats, unlike republicans, aren’t traitors, so they do what’s right, not what’s advantageous.

The whole reason why Pelosi wants to end it soon is because voters will forget about it. Remember 2014 debt ceiling crisis? Democrats got demolished despite GOP getting hurt in January for their antics. She's trying to shove it away because either she thinks it's a political loser, or she's like Biden who doesn't want to hurt the Republicans badly.

Seriously. If the remedy for crimes by using the office for personal gain is waiting to an election, what the hell is the point of impeachment existing at all??

That's bullshit. Dems aren't dropping anything. We're taking the fight to the Senate.

If she thought it was a winner, she would act different. They would not go so fast, and they would not narrow the scope. And yes, if impeachment has a point, why are we ignoring Barr?
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
Well, if Hillary had been elected in 2016, we'd be right where we find ourself today.
Except, it would be Hillary being impeached by republicans and democrats claiming the republicans were wasting their time over nothing.

Key Mueller witness charged with funneling contributions to Clinton campaign

Democrats would be saying the exact same thing with defending Hillary as republicans are now saying with defending Donald Trump.
Republicans would be claiming outrage and shock at what Hillary had done while democrats would be claiming impeaching Hillary was only some phony baloney republican stunt.
Republicans would be claiming the US Constitution was in jeopardy if Hillary were not held accountable.
Democrats would be claiming Hillary had broke no laws, no high crimes and misdemeanors, no smoking guns.
Everything happening today would be exactly the same except the rolls would be switched.
And believe me.... republicans definitely would be impeaching Hillary over the news linked above.

Please. Nader is an equal opportunity grifter-

Nader has acted as a liaison between Trump‘s advisers and Mohammed bin Zayed, crown prince of Abu Dhabi in the United Arab Emirates, as well as Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. In August 2016, Nader met with Donald Trump Jr. to offer help to Trump‘s campaign alongside Blackwater founder Erik Prince and Israeli social media specialist Joel Zamel. In 2017, Nader visited the White House several times to meet with Steve Bannon, then serving as Trump‘s chief strategist.


Nowhere in any of it has the Clinton campaign been credibly accused of knowingly accepting illegal contributions.
 

interchange

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 1999
8,022
2,872
136
If she thought it was a winner, she would act different. They would not go so fast, and they would not narrow the scope. And yes, if impeachment has a point, why are we ignoring Barr?

What matters to me as a citizen is that criminal behavior by a US president against America's interests be swiftly addresses through the mechanism the Constitution provided. I don't give a fuck whether the effort succeeds if the question is whether to pursue the intervention when compelling criminal evidence exists. I want the case judged on its merits. I am sickened by the partisanship. Everyone in the House has the same duty right now. This is not prosecution and defense organized by party. Success is not whether your team wins. It's whether the rule of law holds, whether the institutions of our founders hold whose entire motivation in successfully taking arms against an overwhelming foe was to stop a unitary power from abusing the people's natural rights for their own gain or die. We are in the same place right now. If we don't stand up for America, America dies. I am not a Democrat. I am not rooting for "my team" to win. I am a patriot. My team is America.

And your question about Barr is extremely obvious. How many House's of Representatives do we have? Who's more important? Trump or Barr? I'm pretty sure history has lessons to learn about fighting wars on two fronts simultaneously.
 
  • Like
Reactions: [DHT]Osiris

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
What matters to me as a citizen is that criminal behavior by a US president against America's interests be swiftly addresses through the mechanism the Constitution provided. I don't give a fuck whether the effort succeeds if the question is whether to pursue the intervention when compelling criminal evidence exists. I want the case judged on its merits. I am sickened by the partisanship. Everyone in the House has the same duty right now. This is not prosecution and defense organized by party. Success is not whether your team wins. It's whether the rule of law holds, whether the institutions of our founders hold whose entire motivation in successfully taking arms against an overwhelming foe was to stop a unitary power from abusing the people's natural rights for their own gain or die. We are in the same place right now. If we don't stand up for America, America dies. I am not a Democrat. I am not rooting for "my team" to win. I am a patriot. My team is America.

And your question about Barr is extremely obvious. How many House's of Representatives do we have? Who's more important? Trump or Barr? I'm pretty sure history has lessons to learn about fighting wars on two fronts simultaneously.

Thank you. If the Senate votes to keep a criminal President in office, it's on them.
 

Starbuck1975

Lifer
Jan 6, 2005
14,698
1,909
126
Please. Barron wasn't the butt of the joke. It was just a silly play on his name & disparaged him not in the least. I mean, none of us got to choose our parents, right?
Given the significance and importance of these hearings, you would think a Stanford educated legal scholar would have better sense...or at least a better punchline. This isn’t open mic night.
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
32,565
15,449
136
Given the significance and importance of these hearings, you would think a Stanford educated legal scholar would have better sense...or at least a better punchline. This isn’t open mic night.

I thought she illustrated her point quite clearly.

I can see you are super concerned though that democrats aren’t taking these proceedings serious enough. They better start or you’ll be forced to vote for trump, right?
 

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
111,165
30,117
146
Seriously. If the remedy for crimes by using the office for personal gain is waiting to an election, what the hell is the point of impeachment existing at all??

...and don't forget that his crimes is attempting to fix that election. So, if he isn't impeached, and he isn't stopped, there is 100% chance that he will continue to try and fix the election. He's publicly expressed the desire to do so many times, as it is.

...so, why should we allow him to wait for an election that he has fixed? What is this banana republic bullshit that the GOP is openly endorsing?
 

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
111,165
30,117
146
Given the significance and importance of these hearings, you would think a Stanford educated legal scholar would have better sense...or at least a better punchline. This isn’t open mic night.

good, continue to discredit her for the one bad joke. Make sure that is all that is remembered. Ignore the rest of her valid testimony. Make sure she is nothing more than a bad joke.

she realized that and promptly apologized, but you are doing the work you were assigned to do.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

jmagg

Platinum Member
Nov 21, 2001
2,103
409
126
I'm now doubting it'll ever make the Senate. OpticsOptics. Policy be damned.
 

Starbuck1975

Lifer
Jan 6, 2005
14,698
1,909
126
good, continue to discredit her for the one bad joke. Make sure that is all that is remembered. Ignore the rest of her valid testimony. Make sure she is nothing more than a bad joke.

she realized that and promptly apologized, but you are doing the work you were assigned to do.
She discredits herself.

Progressives had her on their short list of SCOTUS contenders under Obama, but she had too many quotes and “baron” moments on record to credibly defend her impartiality.

I don’t understand the Democrats strategy. CNN had a good article on impeachment support the other day. The people most in favor of the proceedings and watching it obsessively are those who already despise Trump. Republican voters are vested in the deep state narrative, so they’ve tuned out.

But independents are largely tuned out as well. Democrats asking softball questions to three liberal leaning legal scholars is not going to sway them. Making poor jokes undermines the impartiality of the proceedings

If anything, her joke gives credibility to the statements made by Turley.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
85,710
51,000
136
She discredits herself.

Progressives had her on their short list of SCOTUS contenders under Obama, but she had too many quotes and “baron” moments on record to credibly defend her impartiality.

I don’t understand the Democrats strategy. CNN had a good article on impeachment support the other day. The people most in favor of the proceedings and watching it obsessively are those who already despise Trump. Republican voters are vested in the deep state narrative, so they’ve tuned out.

But independents are largely tuned out as well. Democrats asking softball questions to three liberal leaning legal scholars is not going to sway them. Making poor jokes undermines the impartiality of the proceedings

If anything, her joke gives credibility to the statements made by Turley.

You are really putting your usual concern trolling into overdrive today. I love how merely mentioning the President’s son’s name is now the pearl clutching moment that will somehow undermine the proceedings.

Nobody gives a shit other than Republicans who would have just picked something else to be outraged about anyway.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
85,710
51,000
136
Not really

Failed political theater is going to save Trump in the Senate.

No, Republican partisanship will save Trump in the Senate, same as it always was.

Stop trying to blame Democrats for the moral and political failings of conservatives. Conservatives have agency, their choices are 100% their fault.

This is what being an adult is all about.
 

[DHT]Osiris

Lifer
Dec 15, 2015
15,360
13,682
146
Given the significance and importance of these hearings, you would think a Stanford educated legal scholar would have better sense...or at least a better punchline. This isn’t open mic night.
Let's be clear, these entire proceedings are a joke. The last three years has been a fucking joke, lets not get hung up on one punchline.

Trump should have been denied candidacy when he asked for help from Russia prior to being elected, the RNC showed the quality of their character that day. Everything else has been the jester dressed up as a king.
 
  • Like
Reactions: uclaLabrat

K1052

Elite Member
Aug 21, 2003
48,237
37,645
136
You are really putting your usual concern trolling into overdrive today. I love how merely mentioning the President’s son’s name is now the pearl clutching moment that will somehow undermine the proceedings.

Nobody gives a shit other than Republicans who would have just picked something else to be outraged about anyway.

Trump mocked a 13 year old with his Twitter account a couple months ago so anybody taking this 'baron' outrage bullshit seriously can take a long walk off a short pier.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,266
126
The whole reason why Pelosi wants to end it soon is because voters will forget about it. Remember 2014 debt ceiling crisis? Democrats got demolished despite GOP getting hurt in January for their antics. She's trying to shove it away because either she thinks it's a political loser, or she's like Biden who doesn't want to hurt the Republicans badly.





If she thought it was a winner, she would act different. They would not go so fast, and they would not narrow the scope. And yes, if impeachment has a point, why are we ignoring Barr?

Barr shouldn't be ignored but to bring him into impeachment now would be more of a distraction than anything. The Vox article was a good one explaining pros and cons along with different perspectives. IMO, rushing to get things done this month is unwise. Perhaps that's a ploy to catch Republicans in some move of the game, but if that's the intent then I think it foolish and seems half-hearted. The court system so far has moved faster than I expected and the SCOTUS can expedite Constitutional matters such as this significantly, or at least say if it will hear a case or not.

So if it goes into March but reveals much more (and we seem to agree there is that) then calling it quits early is not a good thing.
 
Last edited:

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
85,710
51,000
136
Trump mocked a 13 year old with his Twitter account a couple months ago so anybody taking this 'baron' outrage bullshit seriously can take a long walk off a short pier.

In cases like that the concern trolling shifts to wringing their hands about the Democrats becoming as bad as the Republicans that they never criticize.
 

interchange

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 1999
8,022
2,872
136
I don’t understand the Democrats strategy. CNN had a good article on impeachment support the other day. The people most in favor of the proceedings and watching it obsessively are those who already despise Trump. Republican voters are vested in the deep state narrative, so they’ve tuned out.

This is not a matter of one side strategizing to win a war against another. The strategy for someone representing the US is to determine, at this time, what the constitutional grounds for impeachment are, what standard of evidence makes sense, and whether sufficient evidence exists on a plethora of potential impeachable offenses in order to draft into articles of impeachment and vote on moving them to the Senate for trial.

The truth here is that, in some pieces of this, e.g. instructing staff to defy subpoenas for documents and testimony during an impeachment inquiry with no rational legal argument, the exercise is academic. There is no doubt of that being impeachable conduct detrimental to the US and of Trump's guilt.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
85,710
51,000
136
This is not a matter of one side strategizing to win a war against another. The strategy for someone representing the US is to determine, at this time, what the constitutional grounds for impeachment are, what standard of evidence makes sense, and whether sufficient evidence exists on a plethora of potential impeachable offenses in order to draft into articles of impeachment and vote on moving them to the Senate for trial.

The truth here is that, in some pieces of this, e.g. instructing staff to defy subpoenas for documents and testimony during an impeachment inquiry with no rational legal argument, the exercise is academic. There is no doubt of that being impeachable conduct detrimental to the US and of Trump's guilt.

Turkey’s argument as best as I understand it would s that impeachment of Trump for him trying to rig the 2020 election should be postponed until the legal process plays out, which will likely drag on until far after the 2020 election.

Also he says impeachment should only be about violation of criminal statutes, contradicting 2014 Jonathan Turley and 1998 Jonathan Turley. The guy wants to be on TV and that’s it.
 

Starbuck1975

Lifer
Jan 6, 2005
14,698
1,909
126
You are really putting your usual concern trolling into overdrive today. I love how merely mentioning the President’s son’s name is now the pearl clutching moment that will somehow undermine the proceedings.

Nobody gives a shit other than Republicans who would have just picked something else to be outraged about anyway.
I am sorry, I thought we were trying to impeach a President. If you want to cheer at poor jokes at the President’s expense, I highly recommend Weekend Update.