• 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.

Schiff Issues Subpoena for Whistleblower Complaint Being Unlawfully Withheld

Page 19 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
glenn1 said:
In this thread I am again reminded about how few people on the left actually know the definition of the word "treason" or how it's applied in actual use.
Click to expand...

Honestly, it annoys me too. I would say that Trump engages in treasonous behavior in the vernacular, however for purposes of legal consequences sedition, perhaps charges of espionage and other illegal activities, but in no legal sense has anyone committed treason proper. But to disagree somewhat I expect the "Lockeruppers" aren't any better than anyone else or Trump for that matter.
 
glenn1 said:
Just to remind you, it was a progressive who brought up the subject of "2A remedies" that I was responding to. You've somehow managed to turn that into a screed about right-wing folks instead when the post was about progressives taking up arms.
Click to expand...

The fuck are you talking about? That's a direct Trumpism: "2nd amendment remedies." IF anyone but Trump ever says that, it's obviously in reference to Trump, and your dumbass is being satirized for supporting that kind of direct violence.

It's the entire point.
 
glenn1 said:
In this thread I am again reminded about how few people on the left actually know the definition of the word "treason" or how it's applied in actual use.
Click to expand...

Nah, the use is fine. It doesn't fit the legal term but it certainly fits how the term is used in casual conversation.
 
glenn1 said:
In this thread I am again reminded about how few people on the left actually know the definition of the word "treason" or how it's applied in actual use.
Click to expand...
I know the definition. Since Russia committed an act of war against the United States Trump taking the side of Putin over our country can be argued as treasonous.
 
HomerJS said:
I know the definition. Since Russia committed an act of war against the United States Trump taking the side of Putin over our country can be argued as treasonous.
Click to expand...

You realize that Russia and Ukraine (the subject of this thread) are two separate countries, right?

And even if you accept every single accusation around Russian election meddling and Trump complicity in said meddling, that still doesn't represent treason. Election fraud has a definition and treason has a definition, the two share basically zero overlap.
 
glenn1 said:
You realize that Russia and Ukraine (the subject of this thread) are two separate countries, right?

And even if you accept every single accusation around Russian election meddling and Trump complicity in said meddling, that still doesn't represent treason. Election fraud has a definition and treason has a definition, the two share basically zero overlap.
Click to expand...

He's referring to the other treasonous act--the one involving Putin and openly supporting his meddling in our elections--not this current treasonous act wrg to Ukraine and the next elections.

Oh and, of course conveniently enough, this also benefits Putin. Anything to sew controversy in Ukraine, confuse their #1 ally (the US) against them, is really only ever to Putin's benefit.

But then you probably already know all that. You just don't care.
 
zinfamous said:
He's referring to the other treasonous act--the one involving Putin and openly supporting his meddling in our elections--not this current treasonous act wrg to Ukraine and the next elections.

Oh and, of course conveniently enough, this also benefits Putin. Anything to sew controversy in Ukraine, confuse their #1 ally (the US) against them, is really only ever to Putin's benefit.

But then you probably already know all that. You just don't care.
Click to expand...

Yeah, you just proved (again) you don't know the definition of "treason" and why it's different and distinct from election fraud. Not surprising.
 
glenn1 said:
Yeah, you just proved (again) you don't know the definition of "treason" and why it's different and distinct from election fraud. Not surprising.
Click to expand...

If someone breaks into your friends' house late at night and steals their TV and they say to you 'I've been robbed!' do you correct them and say 'no, you've been burglarized'?
 
nickqt said:
Let's be clear.

The House has...the Sargent at Arms. Some of his duties are protecting Capitol parking lots.

The White House has...the Secret Service, CIA, and US military.

What makes you think Strongman Trump is going to abide by the Sargent at Arms attempting to arrest any of his current co-conspirators?

Are you sufficiently prepared to actually fight for your country? Right now?

It's not a matter of whether Strongman Trump is dangerous, or should be Impeached. It's whether it's the right move right now.

It's arguable about whether it should be tomorrow, or after these accusations have more substance. It's also arguable about whether Strongman Trump being effectively proven "innocent" (to a whole lot of Americans) by the Senate would end up killing the country by making a solid Strongman Trump "win" in November of 2020 more likely.

If, as I suspect, Republicans in the US Senate are loyal to Strongman Trump rather than the Constitution, country, or citizenry, a failed Impeachment may be better for Strongman Trump than a "win" in 2020. Hell, it could negate the need for 2020, if you ask Strongman Trump. And you won't have to, because he'll tell you and his millions of emphatic, armed supporters as much on Twitter, over and over.

Then what? More Impeachment?

Do you think everything I've just stated is unlikely, given everything we've seen so far? I'm interested in how you think an Impeachment tomorrow works out.
Click to expand...

What the Ds can't do (which they've been doing so far) is just cower behind the courts and legal proceedings, use the little time they get for a hearing (when they actually manage to get someone in) to just babble and grandstand, and otherwise try to punt their duties to the electorate at the end of next year while Trump rampages unchecked.

Is this what you voted for in 2018? Does weak and wobbly leadership energize you to vote in 2020?

Is this the way Republicans would handle it if Trump were a D?

Goddammit, they made a mountain out of nothing with emails and Benghazi, and Ds have buckets of ammo and can only seem to hit their own foot.

IMO this sounds like a repeat of 2016 and Trump/Russia, and if Ds don't change course you'll see him steal the election.
 
alien42 said:
it was just announced that Trump will release the transcript of the call with the Ukrainian President tomorrow.
Click to expand...

Make no mistake—they know that the whistleblower will appear before Schiff’s committee and DNI will not prevent. This is Barr/Trump getting out ahead of the narrative again.
 
glenn1 said:
You realize that Russia and Ukraine (the subject of this thread) are two separate countries, right?

And even if you accept every single accusation around Russian election meddling and Trump complicity in said meddling, that still doesn't represent treason. Election fraud has a definition and treason has a definition, the two share basically zero overlap.
Click to expand...

They won't be if Putin has his way. He's already seized Crimea and has invaded Ukraine's Donbass region in the east.

This distinction without a difference argument you are trying to make is laughably obtuse.
 
glenn1 said:
Yeah, you just proved (again) you don't know the definition of "treason" and why it's different and distinct from election fraud. Not surprising.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying they will go after him legally and charge him with treason. I'm just saying that he's very clearly engaging in treasonous acts.
 
glenn1 said:
You realize that Russia and Ukraine (the subject of this thread) are two separate countries, right?

And even if you accept every single accusation around Russian election meddling and Trump complicity in said meddling, that still doesn't represent treason. Election fraud has a definition and treason has a definition, the two share basically zero overlap.
Click to expand...
I'm referring to Russia's cyber attack. Trump aided and abetted Russia at Helsinki
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top