Impeachment Number Two

[Ozlsn]

3 hours ago, Cartmann99 said:

Orange Fatuous Man 

I was about to say "Orange flatulent man", but no, that's Rudy.

[Black Aliss]

1 hour ago, Shrubbery said:

How long until van der Veen gets to Hilary‘s emails, now?

Also Benghhhaaaazzzzi! Where four Americans died! (Four is way more than 5, isn't it?)

[fraurosena]

Who was it that queried when they would bring up Hillary again? 

 

[SeekingAdventure]

of course. How come they haven't locked her up yet?! ?

[thoughtful]

7 minutes ago, fraurosena said:

Who was it that queried when they would bring up Hillary again? 

 

Yeah, that was the bullshit question I mentioned earlier - one of those "if you get to do it, we could do it to your precious people, too" things.

It was Rubio (I mistakenly thought it was Cruz - sorry).

I went back and listened, and they just said "the gentleman from Florida" - no name.

Edited February 12, 2021 by thoughtful

[fraurosena]

1 minute ago, thoughtful said:

It was Rubio (I mistakenly thought it was Cruz - sorry).

I went back and listened, and they just said "the gentleman from Florida" - no name.

Oh, I’m sorry, I meant which poster here asked when Hillary would be brought into it. ?

 

[thoughtful]

9 minutes ago, fraurosena said:

Oh, I’m sorry, I meant which poster here asked when Hillary would be brought into it. ?

 

I  knew that (edited to make that clearer) - I was just correcting my error anyway.

[Howl]

I read this Politico article published yesterday (Friday, Feb 12)  and came away with a subtext that because Pence is running for Pres in 2024, he can't stand up, be a real man and tell the actual flucking gosh darned truth about Trump deliberately endangering the lives of him and his family on Jan 6,  and is currently reduced to being a passive-aggressive little bitch while remaining in hiding.  This is not a good look. 

Mike Pence Gets His Revenge By Letting It Be Known That Trump’s Impeachment Lawyers Are Lying

Edited February 13, 2021 by Howl

[fraurosena]

But what good would censuring do?

The only 'positive' I can see is that it is an excuse for Republicans to hide behind when they acquit Trump: See, we did something! We're not letting him get off scot free! We're not so bad after all.

It's not like it will stop Trump from running again and agitating and riling up his base if he wants.

 

 

Edited February 13, 2021 by fraurosena
Yay, I found out how to edit! Use the three dots on the right of the username bar and you get an edit option.

[SeekingAdventure]

Wouldn't a vote to impeach him sort of make the point, too?!

_________________________________

They had a vote about calling witnesses, and 5 republicans voted yes (including Graham) I am so confused, I really don't get that guy. The defense is really confused and didn't expect it..

 

Also, McTurtle apperantly has now decided to vote to aquit

Edited February 13, 2021 by SeekingAdventure
distancing the two merged posts

[church_of_dog]

42 minutes ago, fraurosena said:

But what good would censuring do?

The only 'positive' I can see is that it is an excuse for Republicans to hide behind when they acquit Trump: See, we did something! We're not letting him get off scot free! We're not so bad after all.

It's not like it will stop Trump from running again and agitating and riling up his base if he wants.

 

 

Apparently there is an obscure section in the 14th Amendment that would permit them (and by only a simple majority, apparently) to prohibit him from holding that office ever again.

The censure being discussed/considered could include that and would, as I understand it, have that kind of teeth.

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/bipartisan-senate-duo-crafts-censure-resolution-bar-trump/story?id=75518145

Assuming the impeachment trial ends in acquittal, I hope they promptly do the above.

[SeekingAdventure]

I believe that's always been the plan. But I don't think they wanted to go straight to that, because they are trying to give Republicans a chance to actually show that they are not completely repulsive.

Also, if they would've gone straight to THAT vote, there would've been an outcry, because unity etc..

[church_of_dog]

I have recently discovered an online "magazine" that presents fact-based (and footnoted) articles about very current events.  I've even subscribed to their daily email (in general I'm trying to reduce content thrown at me in this way, but I was so impressed with these folks that I signed up).

theconversation.com

Edited February 13, 2021 by church_of_dog

[Howl]

48 minutes ago, SeekingAdventure said:

Also, McTurtle apperantly has now decided to vote to aquit

Anything McConnell said about listening to the evidence before making a decision was total, complete, utter bullshit. 

The evidence is overwhelming that Trump planned and incited an insurrection but McTurtle would never convict, ever.  He has no moral center; it's all about power, retaining it and deploying it. 

[Howl]

44 minutes ago, SeekingAdventure said:

because they are trying to give Republicans a chance to actually show that they are not completely repulsive.

...a chance to save face.  Ish.   But might be better than a straight "not guilty" vote. 

[fraurosena]

8 minutes ago, Howl said:

Anything McConnell said about listening to the evidence before making a decision was total, complete, utter bullshit. 

The evidence is overwhelming that Trump planned and incited an insurrection but McTurtle would never convict, ever.  He has no moral center; it's all about power, retaining it and deploying it. 

Like you say, all McConnell ever thinks about his holding on to personal power. He's been a powerhouse in the GOP for more than a decade now, and he's not going to relinquish that position no matter the cost. At the moment, the Qanon conspiracy theorist white supremacists are becoming more and more powerful within the party, so of course McConnell is going to align himself with them. Even if it means turning the GOP into GQP. The once slow decline into an extremist trumpian party is nearing the rapids now, and we'll see them become more and more fascist and supremacist as the weeks pass. I predict there will be nothing left of the original GOP by the end of the year, if it even takes that long.

[SeekingAdventure]

well, I never expected McTurtle to vote yay (or yea?) so i totally agree with you there @Howl I just thought it was noteworthy, and it was on CNN as top news, I figured I might as well share it. it is not often that I get to be the one to share something here that hasn't been shared before

 

and yes, it is a saving face for some republicans. But I believe it's more importantly the Dems thinking if they would've gone straight to the 14th, they would be given a lot of shit about: well, you could have done this and that and that.. so they did. and once the republicans show that they don't have an honest bone in their body, they can still go to that, but at least they tried to do something with them together..

[Cartmann99]

1 hour ago, church_of_dog said:

Apparently there is an obscure section in the 14th Amendment that would permit them (and by only a simple majority, apparently) to prohibit him from holding that office ever again.

I can see him holding rallies where he tells his fans it's unconstitutional for Congress to prevent him from running and asking them to fund a lawsuit against Congress.

On a lighter note:

 

[SeekingAdventure]

so, they decided to not call witnesses now, but instead entered the statement, and now there are closing arguments?

Did I understand that correctly?

[clueliss]

Thanks for the updates today.  I’ve been doing Saturday cleaning chores (because in covid world I’ve discovered that clean makes me ridiculously happy and less anxious, never made that connection until rather recently) and doing a WW Oprah live event so I’ve not paid attention today and only just now trying to sit down and pay attention to proceedings having stepped away at 10 am central time or so.  (Translation, I’m confused) (however the good news is the apartment is clean, for now)

[Shrubbery]

How desperate was the orange one that he picked vdV? I wouldn’t want him to defend me for a parking violation, let alone impeachment.

He has one precedent he will cite (Brandenburg v. Ohio, about a Klansman no less), one buzzword to fling about (due process) and an inability to remember what the other side argued exactly. 

Right now he‘s going on about BLM protesters and their „violence“ and I’m not even pissed off because I’m too busy rolling my eyes.

[SeekingAdventure]

I just literally snorted when vdV said that they should concentrate on more urgent matters like the pandemic. Like really dude?!

he's just such an idiot, i can't even. I just listened to that and tried to explain to my mum (who doesn't even speak english that well, but realised that he's a little weasel) why whatever he said was so dumb that I just kept well, laughing and snorting and rolling my eyes..

___ (might get merged)

 

Guys, it is voting time. They are reading the article of impeachment now, and then they will vote (3.34 pm)

[clueliss]

57 guilty, 43 not, they needed 67

[thoughtful]

So the shitty fuckers are still shitty fuckers.

Thanks to the 57 people with a brain.

[Shrubbery]

I caught Collins, Murkowski and Romney, what other 4 republicans voted guilty?