trump Inpeachment...............

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by Giantone

yes, trump is.

I know you are being specious but to be clear I meant your statement, not you, and I meant the statement about Trump being a dictator, or monarch.

[CRedskinsRule]

I will make a guarantee now. If the Republicans don't close this circus down before this weekend, there will be a "BOMBSHELL" leak every 24 hour cycle just like the Kavanaugh trial and all of it will be the Democrats favorite method unnamed and unverifiable sources.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

I know you are being specious but to be clear I meant your statement, not you, and I meant the statement about Trump being a dictator, or monarch.

Yes, trump admires Kim and Putin and wish's to be more like them .

[CRedskinsRule]

Another article, by Turley, describing the real reason the Trump is still in office.

https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciar...th-impeachment

This is not Monday morning quarterbacking. This very series of events was expressly laid out before the vote, and House Democrats made a decision to choose certain failure over completing their impeachment case. There was no reason to expect Senate Republicans to assist House managers in making their case, particularly in calling witnesses not subpoenaed by the House. Democrats had opposed any witnesses in the impeachment trial of President Clinton and voted as a bloc for a summary acquittal. There was no reason to expect Republicans to adopt an entirely different approach.
We will never know how this impeachment trial would have unfolded if the House had waited to secure additional testimony and court orders. One thing, however, is certain. The case against the president could only have become stronger. The vote for witnesses failed by one for a tie and by two for a majority. A more complete record could well have tipped the balance and certainly would have made the vote against witnesses more difficult for some senators. Instead, the House submitted an incomplete record and failed to subpoena important witnesses like Bolton, making it quite easy for the Senate to refuse to do what the House had never even tried.

If the Democrats in the House had pushed through and offered even a semi fair process, and they got a judge to order the release of documents or witness testimony to the House like in the Nixon case, I think it isn't a stretch to say they could have gotten Trump to step down vis a vis the Nixon precedent. But by rushing a slip shod case through and turning that task over to your opponent's control, the House ceded control and the result was predictable from the outset.



Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

Another article, by Turley, describing the real reason the Trump is still in office.

https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciar...th-impeachment



If the Democrats in the House had pushed through and offered even a semi fair process, and they got a judge to order the release of documents or witness testimony to the House like in the Nixon case, I think it isn't a stretch to say they could have gotten Trump to step down vis a vis the Nixon precedent. But by rushing a slip shod case through and turning that task over to your opponent's control, the House ceded control and the result was predictable from the outset.



Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

Yup Monday morning QB alright. To sit there and say the Dems screwed up is pure spin . The senate was never going to find trump guilty Moscow Mitch said as much. To blame Dems is a cover up for the republicans.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by Giantone

Yup Monday morning QB alright. To sit there and say the Dems screwed up is pure spin . The senate was never going to find trump guilty Moscow Mitch said as much. To blame Dems is a cover up for the republicans.

Turley said this at the time (I included it in the quote). It isn't Monday Morning qb'ing if you are told beforehand. If the Dems knew or assumed that the Senate would acquit, they should have gone to every possible avenue to make it politically impossible but they didn't.


I really don't understand why the House rushed it like they did. With their majority, they could have forced the testimony they say now that so badly wanted and had most of it well before the 2020 election. They spoon fed the Senate an easy way out.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

Turley said this at the time (I included it in the quote). It isn't Monday Morning qb'ing if you are told beforehand. If the Dems knew or assumed that the Senate would acquit, they should have gone to every possible avenue to make it politically impossible but they didn't.


I really don't understand why the House rushed it like they did. With their majority, they could have forced the testimony they say now that so badly wanted and had most of it well before the 2020 election. They spoon fed the Senate an easy way out.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

LOL, ..."rushed it" after the republicans bitched about Pelosi not sending them right away and holding on to them, yes spin.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by Giantone

LOL, ..."rushed it" after the republicans bitched about Pelosi not sending them right away and holding on to them, yes spin.

It isn't spin, the House pushed the impeachment thru in 48 days then held the Articles of Impeachment 33 days. That should be something that we all can agree since it is purely by the calendar.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

[SunnySide]

Dems should have issued subpoenas to witnesses. Then taken it to Court. In an ideal world, the House indicts and the Senate tries it. But in this political world, Pelosi knew or should have known that the Senate would block any attempt at actually putting on a trial or doing their legislative duty.

Now the Legislative branch completely works for the Executive branch. Now every sitting president will be "impeached" if the other political party controls the House.

They should have issued subpoenas and forced the Court's to rule on testimony.

Our political system is broken and there is no going back imo. Our democracy and republic isnt dying, its dead.

C'est la vie.

this is Idiocracy in real time.

[BaltimoreSkins]

They did issue subpoenas they didn't show because of executive privilege. They go to court that would drag all they way to the supreme court how long would that take?

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by SunnySide

Dems should have issued subpoenas to witnesses. Then taken it to Court. In an ideal world, the House indicts and the Senate tries it. But in this political world, Pelosi knew or should have known that the Senate would block any attempt at actually putting on a trial or doing their legislative duty.



Now the Legislative branch completely works for the Executive branch. Now every sitting president will be "impeached" if the other political party controls the House.



They should have issued subpoenas and forced the Court's to rule on testimony.



Our political system is broken and there is no going back imo. Our democracy and republic isnt dying, its dead.



C'est la vie.



this is Idiocracy in real time.

This is the truth honestly.

Trump is an idiotic president, and everyone knows I support him, but the whole body politic has left the realm of what the framers intended.

Washington warned of foreign entanglements and political division. He was right too.

They had the Senate not democratically elected but sent feom the states. Thus giving our country's government structure four separate and independent paths to judge the will of the people. We have already removed the Senate check, and likely soon, in this divisive time, we will see the electoral college check be removed as well. And then we will be a "pure" democracy, followed shortly after that our childrens children won't even understand what was special about the United States of America.





Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by BaltimoreSkins

They did issue subpoenas they didn't show because of executive privilege. They go to court that would drag all they way to the supreme court how long would that take?

In the Nixon House hearings it was expedited within about 3 months. But again why does the House not following the due process mean that the Accused should lose the ability to exercise those court challenges.

In Nixon's impeachment, the Republicans were united behind a President who had been overwhelmingly elected, but then the House took the appropriate path through the courts, and some condemning facts changed Republican hearts enough to have a bipartisan impeachment(410-4) which led to Nixon's resignation. I believe that, had the House done the right thing, and had they found a smoking gun, they would have swayed some of the republicans. Not all, because the dems have gone to the nth degree to impeach him, but likely beyond the 67 percent threshold. Likewise, had they gone the right path, and the evidence exonerated Trump i would hope that a reasonable portion of the moderate democratic population would have turned against impeaxhment.

The dems in the house didnt want to take the chance the released documents would show enough valid concern that Trump's guilt could not be pushed and the r's in the senate fear there is enough there that his guilt would be inferred.

Both parties in there particular role acted in bad faith to the constitution. It is unfair to judge ONLY the senate republicans or ONLY the house democrats, for BOTH groups failed the constitution.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

[BaltimoreSkins]

I guess I am questioning whether the courts would be any better?

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by BaltimoreSkins

I guess I am questioning whether the courts would be any better?

I believe that IF the House made a case that there was an urgency around the elections then the Courts would have acted with expedience. The House implicitly argues that it was not worth their time to even try to find out, and that to me is wrong.

In other words, I believe the courts would find, with reasonable evidence, that protection of our election process was worthy of expediting. Heck they expedited the NFL NFLPA lawsuits in 2010 over the CBA because of a football season.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

[SunnySide]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

we will see the electoral college check be removed as well. And then we will be a "pure" democracy, followed shortly after that our childrens children won't even understand what was special about the United States of America.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

2 senators represent 760k people (North Dakota)
2 senators represent 882k people (South Dakota)
2 senators represent 39M (California)
2 senators represent 28M (Texas)
2 senators represent 19M (NY)

^^ that is so unbalanced and I dont want to hear about how the House number of reps per State takes into account citizens etc.

But it is what it is.

Electoral College - That would take a constitutional amendment and I dont see that happenning in our life time. While it would mean an automatic D president, I wouldnt want that.

As a D, I dont think Id want to see what an AOC left president, house and senate would do. We are seeing what the worst of the R can and will do now. Thankfully the D took the house to pump the brakes a bit.

---------------------

Subpoenas - the whole point in issuing them is so you can enforce them. Im typing one up now as we speak. if you dont enforce a subpoena, its not a subpoena .... its a request with a "pretty please" at the end.

Pelosi should have absolutely sought to enforce the subpoenas vs this shit show of now wanting to re-open things etc.

It is what it is.