Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

The obvious has been officially confirmed ...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Sam
    replied
    Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
    As I noted in another thread, ostensibly this is done so that Trump doesn't know what sort of evidence they uncover which is a ridiculous claim. You can bet your last dollar that Trump is being kept informed by some of the Republicans on the committee about what is going on so the only ones left in the dark is the American public. And that is why the hearings are secret. This way the only thing we hear is what Schiff wants released -- complete with his usual "spin[1]."






    1. Like his supposed "parody" of what Trump said to Zelensky that was reported as being actual quotes.

    Bill Taylor reportedly contradicted Gordon Sonderland's claim that he wasn't aware of Trump's specific interest in investigating Biden and Burisma, with associated documentation.

    The depositions are not public for the same reason that most, if not all, depositions are not public: to prevent witness collaboration and to facilitate fact-finding. Y'all weren't complaining about the Benghazi depositions occurring in closed-door sessions so don't go caterwauling now. It's just blatant special pleading.

    --Sam

    Leave a comment:


  • rogue06
    replied
    Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
    I mean the fact that the hearings are taking place behind closed doors out of public view.
    As I noted in another thread, ostensibly this is done so that Trump doesn't know what sort of evidence they uncover which is a ridiculous claim. You can bet your last dollar that Trump is being kept informed by some of the Republicans on the committee about what is going on so the only ones left in the dark is the American public. And that is why the hearings are secret. This way the only thing we hear is what Schiff wants released -- complete with his usual "spin[1]."






    1. Like his supposed "parody" of what Trump said to Zelensky that was reported as being actual quotes.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mountain Man
    replied
    Originally posted by JimLamebrain View Post
    What exactly do you mean by secret hearings, MM. Are you under the impression that there are no republicans at the hearings asking questions of the witnesses? Is that it?
    I mean the fact that the hearings are taking place behind closed doors out of public view.

    Leave a comment:


  • Cow Poke
    replied
    Originally posted by JimL View Post
    My point is that you asserted that the Congressional investigation is entirely political,
    Then you'd be able to provide a quote where I actually "asserted" that, yes?

    insinuating that it's just a Congressional dog and pony show.
    Jim, is incredibly partisan - that's really undeniable.

    It isn't. It's a serious matter, and the democrats in charge are making sure that it isn't turned into a dog and pony show.
    Serious matter or not, the Democrats are acting like a bunch of jackasses, and Schiff is the ring leader.

    They've been at this forever, Jim, and it's one "serious matter" after another after another... and it is clearly partisan.

    Leave a comment:


  • JimL
    replied
    Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
    Never said it did, Jim. And I'm not "calling" it political for any other reason than that's what it has become.



    I thought we were buds now, Jim? I'm not "arguing" anything. It is what it is. If Trump is guilty of something for which he needs to be impeached, let the process play out, whatever it is.

    What, exactly, is your point?
    My point is that you asserted that the Congressional investigation is entirely political, insinuating that it's just a Congressional dog and pony show. It isn't. It's a serious matter, and the democrats in charge are making sure that it isn't turned into a dog and pony show.

    Leave a comment:


  • JimL
    replied
    Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
    Is that why Democrats are cavalierly inventing their own impeachment process with secret hearings, because the facts aren't on their side?
    What exactly do you mean by secret hearings, MM. Are you under the impression that there are no republicans at the hearings asking questions of the witnesses? Is that it?

    Leave a comment:


  • Mountain Man
    replied
    Originally posted by JimLamebrain View Post
    It's when you don't have the facts on your side that you argue process!
    Is that why Democrats are cavalierly inventing their own impeachment process with secret hearings, because the facts aren't on their side?

    Leave a comment:


  • Cow Poke
    replied
    Originally posted by JimL View Post
    Calling it political, doesn't change the underlying facts of the investigation.
    Never said it did, Jim. And I'm not "calling" it political for any other reason than that's what it has become.

    It's when you don't have the facts on your side that you argue process!
    I thought we were buds now, Jim? I'm not "arguing" anything. It is what it is. If Trump is guilty of something for which he needs to be impeached, let the process play out, whatever it is.

    What, exactly, is your point?

    Leave a comment:


  • JimL
    replied
    Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
    Quite serious.



    Regardless what the framers intended, it has become a political weapon. A case in point is the way the Democrats are handling the "official" beginning of the impeachment proceedings. They can't even decide what to call it, and can't go for a full vote of the House to proceed because they want to provide cover for Democrats in some districts NOT to be on the record as being "for" impeachment. And for political reasons.

    If there are grounds for impeachment, the political calculation comes in - "what if we vote to impeach in the House, but we know the Senate will not convict"....

    It's entirely political. It's certainly not a "legal" proceeding.
    Calling it political, doesn't change the underlying facts of the investigation. It's when you don't have the facts on your side that you argue process!

    Leave a comment:


  • Cow Poke
    replied
    Originally posted by NorrinRadd View Post
    I'm not sure if you're being serious or sarcastic.
    Quite serious.

    Legal experts -- Dersh, at the very least -- have noted that the Framers were concerned that it *not* be a "political" process, at least in the *partisan* sense, else it effectively makes the Executive branch subordinate to the Legislative branch, obviating separation of powers and remaking our system into a de facto parliamentary system which it was never intended to be.
    Regardless what the framers intended, it has become a political weapon. A case in point is the way the Democrats are handling the "official" beginning of the impeachment proceedings. They can't even decide what to call it, and can't go for a full vote of the House to proceed because they want to provide cover for Democrats in some districts NOT to be on the record as being "for" impeachment. And for political reasons.

    If there are grounds for impeachment, the political calculation comes in - "what if we vote to impeach in the House, but we know the Senate will not convict"....

    It's entirely political. It's certainly not a "legal" proceeding.

    Leave a comment:


  • NorrinRadd
    replied
    Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
    ...or because it's in their best political interest...

    Impeachment is, after all, an entirely political process.
    I'm not sure if you're being serious or sarcastic.

    Legal experts -- Dersh, at the very least -- have noted that the Framers were concerned that it *not* be a "political" process, at least in the *partisan* sense, else it effectively makes the Executive branch subordinate to the Legislative branch, obviating separation of powers and remaking our system into a de facto parliamentary system which it was never intended to be.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mountain Man
    replied
    Originally posted by JimL View Post
    Apparently you missed ambassador Taylor's testimony today!
    You mean the testimony where Mr. Taylor said, and I quote:

    According to Mr. Morrison, President Trump told Ambassador Sondland that he was not asking for a "quid pro quo".

    Is that the testimony you're referring to?

    And from the honorable Rep. John Ratcliffe:

    At the end of the day, this was about quid pro quo and whether or not the Ukrainians were aware that military aid was being withheld, and on that most important issue, neither this witness nor any other witness has provided any evidence that there was a quid pro quo, or any evidence that the Ukrainians were aware that military aid was being withheld on July 25th, and unless and until they bring in a witness who is willing to say that there was knowledge by someone that speaks Ukrainian to that fact, a quid pro quo is legally impossible.

    [...]

    Ambassador Taylor again, today, I found him to be very forthright. He had very strong opinions on Donald Trump’s approach to foreign policy. But, again, the mainstream media reporting that he provided evidence of a quid pro quo involving military aid is false. I questioned him directly on that. And under Adam Schiff’s rules I can’t tell you what he said but I can tell you what he didn’t say. Neither he or any other witness has provided testimony that the Ukrainians were aware that military aide was being withheld. You can’t have a quid pro quo with no quo!

    [...]

    The prosecution is missing an essential element of their case: there is no quid pro until someone from the Ukraine says we knew that military aide was being withheld during that July 25th call, and that testimony hasn't come, and it's not coming.

    https://theconservativetreehouse.com...omment-page-1/

    Last edited by Mountain Man; 10-22-2019, 09:30 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • oxmixmudd
    replied
    Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
    Before you start tossing around allegations like that, you might want to get your facts straight first, bucko.

    “The money that was held up had nothing to do with Biden,” [White House Chief of Staff Mick] Mulvaney said.

    https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2...to-dnc-server/

    Independent testimony from those directly involved and not beholden to trump says otherwise.

    Jim

    Leave a comment:


  • JimL
    replied
    Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
    Before you start tossing around allegations like that, you might want to get your facts straight first, bucko.

    “The money that was held up had nothing to do with Biden,” [White House Chief of Staff Mick] Mulvaney said.

    https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2...to-dnc-server/

    And you might want to get your head out of the propaganda bubble once in a while and take a peek to see what the actual facts are. Apparently you missed ambassador Taylor's testimony today!

    Leave a comment:


  • Mountain Man
    replied
    Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
    No MM. There is no legitimate reason for POTUS to hold up security funds for Ukraine allocated by Congress over not investigating Joe Biden's son. There are plenty of (illegal) reasons for Donald Trump to hold up security funds for the Ukraine over not investigating Joe Biden's son.
    Before you start tossing around allegations like that, you might want to get your facts straight first, bucko.

    “The money that was held up had nothing to do with Biden,” [White House Chief of Staff Mick] Mulvaney said.

    https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2...to-dnc-server/

    Leave a comment:

Related Threads

Collapse

Topics Statistics Last Post
Started by little_monkey, Yesterday, 04:19 PM
16 responses
155 views
0 likes
Last Post One Bad Pig  
Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
53 responses
400 views
0 likes
Last Post Mountain Man  
Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
25 responses
114 views
0 likes
Last Post rogue06
by rogue06
 
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
33 responses
198 views
0 likes
Last Post Roy
by Roy
 
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
84 responses
373 views
0 likes
Last Post JimL
by JimL
 
Working...
X