Originally posted by Teallaura
View Post
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.
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less
Poll: Any more impeachment suprises coming?
Collapse
X
-
Geislerminian Antinomian Kenotic Charispneumaticostal Gender Mutualist-Egalitarian.
Beige Federalist.
Nationalist Christian.
"Everybody is somebody's heretic."
Social Justice is usually the opposite of actual justice.
Proud member of the this space left blank community.
Would-be Grand Vizier of the Padishah Maxi-Super-Ultra-Hyper-Mega-MAGA King Trumpius Rex.
Justice for Ashli Babbitt!
Justice for Matthew Perna!
Arrest Ray Epps and his Fed bosses!
-
I think it will be like the Kavanaugh fiasco, with an endless constant leaky bladder dribbling of new major-but-actually-trivial accusations.Geislerminian Antinomian Kenotic Charispneumaticostal Gender Mutualist-Egalitarian.
Beige Federalist.
Nationalist Christian.
"Everybody is somebody's heretic."
Social Justice is usually the opposite of actual justice.
Proud member of the this space left blank community.
Would-be Grand Vizier of the Padishah Maxi-Super-Ultra-Hyper-Mega-MAGA King Trumpius Rex.
Justice for Ashli Babbitt!
Justice for Matthew Perna!
Arrest Ray Epps and his Fed bosses!
Comment
-
Originally posted by JimL View PostNo, we won't be surprised, Tea, we already know the trial is rigged in his favor. But if he isn't convicted in the Senate, he may very well be, as a result of the trial, ousted by the American people.
Comment
-
Originally posted by seanD View PostSo are you going to be among those in the streets rioting if he's not impeached and reelected?
That said, there should be protests, not riots, the republicans have been, and would be continuing to, aid and abet a wannabe dictator to become the dictator that he wants to be. They'd be aiding and abetting in the cover-up of his crimes that they know he committed against the country. So yes, if they put on a sham trial, if they for the first time out of 15 impeachments in this country, disallow witnesses and documentary evidence in order to hide the truth from the jury, i.e. from the American people, then there should be protests of some sort, and I hope if that is the way the trial goes, that there will be protests, and I'd be right there with them.Last edited by JimL; 01-17-2020, 11:08 PM.
Comment
-
Amusing cartoon today...
It's a good reminder that when the Dems were doing the House investigation to decide whether there should be an impeachment trial, the Republicans had an endless stream of complaints about how the investigation wasn't a proper trial... and now that the Dems have turned it over to the Republican controlled Senate for the actual trial... the Republicans have decided they don't want to have a proper trial."I hate him passionately", he's "a demonic force" - Tucker Carlson, in private, on Donald Trump
"Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism" - George Orwell
"[Capitalism] as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evils. I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy" - Albert Einstein
Comment
-
Originally posted by Teallaura View PostThe Dems will be very surprised when Trump isn't removed from office.
The Republican Senate will just vote to acquit and that will be that."I hate him passionately", he's "a demonic force" - Tucker Carlson, in private, on Donald Trump
"Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism" - George Orwell
"[Capitalism] as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evils. I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy" - Albert Einstein
Comment
-
Originally posted by Starlight View PostDo you seriously think any Dems actually believe that Republican Senators will honor their constitutional oath to have an impartial trial? McConnell's already said he won't hold to that oath. Republicans don't give two figs about their oaths or the constitution, they'll just support their own party above all else, and everyone knows it.
The Republican Senate will just vote to acquit and that will be that.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Starlight View PostDo you seriously think any Dems actually believe that Republican Senators will honor their constitutional oath to have an impartial trial? McConnell's already said he won't hold to that oath. Republicans don't give two figs about their oaths or the constitution, they'll just support their own party above all else, and everyone knows it.
The Republican Senate will just vote to acquit and that will be that.
Comment
-
Originally posted by JimL View PostAnd the ultra righties on this site know that, and are all for it, as is made obvious by their arguments to keep the relevant evidence out. They don't want to take a chance and possibly be faced with the ugly truth. Although mostly I think they already know the ugly truth, but their party is more important to them than is the Constitution, their country or democracy itself.
You're cute when you get all wild-eyed, Jim.Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
sigpic
I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist
Comment
-
Originally posted by One Bad Pig View PostAny time you spout rhetoric this divorced from reality, it seems to be when even you realize you've got nothing better to stand on than to hope your interlocutors get ticked off and write angry replies back.
You're cute when you get all wild-eyed, Jim.Last edited by JimL; 01-18-2020, 08:53 PM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Starlight View PostDo you seriously think any Dems actually believe that Republican Senators will honor their constitutional oath to have an impartial trial? McConnell's already said he won't hold to that oath. Republicans don't give two figs about their oaths or the constitution, they'll just support their own party above all else, and everyone knows it.
I'm always still in trouble again
"You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
"Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
"Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman
Comment
-
Originally posted by JimL View PostAnd the ultra righties on this site know that, and are all for it, as is made obvious by their arguments to keep the relevant evidence out. They don't want to take a chance and possibly be faced with the ugly truth. Although mostly I think they already know the ugly truth, but their party is more important to them than is the Constitution, their country or democracy itself.
As he put it, if the Democrats really thought that they had an "overwhelming" case the last thing they would want to do was call more witnesses since they would be wildcards that would far more likely weaken their case than bolster it. If the case was truly "overwhelming" as they claim you would be a fool to tamper with it, but if OTOH you realize that it is full of holes then and only then would you bring in folks who you do not know what they'll say when they testify.
It all goes back to the old adage about only an imprudent lawyer asks questions of a witness that the lawyer doesn't already know the answers to.
1. We've been friends since the 80s and he's always said I was one of his favorite clients because I never did anything that made his job harder. The last time I required his services was over 25 years ago and I had to ask for a continuance because he was busy with a murder case in another county that day (mine was a pretty minor misdemeanor). When I was applying for it with the prosecutor and a court clerk they asked for the name of my attorney and their shocked reaction was priceless when I gave it to them. They were expecting one of the ambulance chasers that were handling everyone's else minor cases not a top flight lawyer. All of a sudden they started treating me with respect as a result
I'm always still in trouble again
"You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
"Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
"Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman
Comment
-
Originally posted by rogue06 View PostHad breakfast with my lawyer about a week ago. His firm is handling a lawsuit for me though he himself is one of the top criminal lawyers in the region[1]. He's no fan of Trump's calling him President Oompa-Loompa but did remark on the Democrat's demands for witnesses to testify now that they weren't all that interested in testifying before the House.
As he put it, if the Democrats really thought that they had an "overwhelming" case the last thing they would want to do was call more witnesses since they would be wildcards that would far more likely weaken their case than bolster it. If the case was truly "overwhelming" as they claim you would be a fool to tamper with it, but if OTOH you realize that it is full of holes then and only then would you bring in folks who you do not know what they'll say when they testify.
It all goes back to the old adage about only an imprudent lawyer asks questions of a witness that the lawyer doesn't already know the answers to.
1. We've been friends since the 80s and he's always said I was one of his favorite clients because I never did anything that made his job harder. The last time I required his services was over 25 years ago and I had to ask for a continuance because he was busy with a murder case in another county that day (mine was a pretty minor misdemeanor). When I was applying for it with the prosecutor and a court clerk they asked for the name of my attorney and their shocked reaction was priceless when I gave it to them. They were expecting one of the ambulance chasers that were handling everyone's else minor cases not a top flight lawyer. All of a sudden they started treating me with respect as a result
Comment
-
Originally posted by rogue06 View PostThey take an oath to uphold the constitution as well you know."I hate him passionately", he's "a demonic force" - Tucker Carlson, in private, on Donald Trump
"Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism" - George Orwell
"[Capitalism] as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evils. I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy" - Albert Einstein
Comment
-
Originally posted by rogue06 View PostHad breakfast with my lawyer about a week ago. His firm is handling a lawsuit for me though he himself is one of the top criminal lawyers in the region[1]. He's no fan of Trump's calling him President Oompa-Loompa but did remark on the Democrat's demands for witnesses to testify now that they weren't all that interested in testifying before the House.
As he put it, if the Democrats really thought that they had an "overwhelming" case the last thing they would want to do was call more witnesses since they would be wildcards that would far more likely weaken their case than bolster it. If the case was truly "overwhelming" as they claim you would be a fool to tamper with it, but if OTOH you realize that it is full of holes then and only then would you bring in folks who you do not know what they'll say when they testify.
It all goes back to the old adage about only an imprudent lawyer asks questions of a witness that the lawyer doesn't already know the answers to.
1. We've been friends since the 80s and he's always said I was one of his favorite clients because I never did anything that made his job harder. The last time I required his services was over 25 years ago and I had to ask for a continuance because he was busy with a murder case in another county that day (mine was a pretty minor misdemeanor). When I was applying for it with the prosecutor and a court clerk they asked for the name of my attorney and their shocked reaction was priceless when I gave it to them. They were expecting one of the ambulance chasers that were handling everyone's else minor cases not a top flight lawyer. All of a sudden they started treating me with respect as a result
On the other hand, if anyone is actually interested in the truth they would want to hear new relevant information. Beyond reasonable doubt can always be shattered by one piece of evidence. From what has been presented so far the case is beyond reasonable doubt. That means that there is no other reasonable explanation that accounts for the evidence. That doesn't mean a reasonable explanation doesn't exist its up to the defence to present it. So far its been a whole lot of whining about unfairness - thats not a reasonable explanation to account for the evidence.
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by seer, Yesterday, 11:06 AM
|
3 responses
109 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Sam
Yesterday, 05:00 PM
|
||
Started by carpedm9587, Yesterday, 07:03 AM
|
16 responses
93 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Mountain Man
Yesterday, 02:40 PM
|
||
Started by rogue06, 05-17-2024, 09:51 AM
|
0 responses
20 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by rogue06
05-17-2024, 09:51 AM
|
||
Started by seer, 05-16-2024, 05:00 PM
|
0 responses
32 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by seer
05-16-2024, 05:00 PM
|
||
Started by seer, 05-16-2024, 11:43 AM
|
219 responses
885 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by seer
Today, 09:34 AM
|
Comment