Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #5851  
Old 12-03-2019, 09:57 AM
Fiveyearlurker is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 6,868
Sit back and realize that the Republican party's actual defense is that Trump was so singularly concerned about Ukrainian corruption that he enlisted the Ukrainian government to investigate corruption in the United States. In what world does this make any sense?
  #5852  
Old 12-03-2019, 10:10 AM
Walken After Midnight is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 5,398
Katherine Faulders, ABC News:
Quote:
Today in impeachment — House Intel members will continue viewing the impeachment report behind closed doors. I’m told it’s approx 175 pages long. The Intel committee will vote on the report around 6pm and it will be made public shortly thereafter.
David M. Drucker, Washington Examiner:
Quote:
NEW: Congressional Republicans are gradually embracing the claim of Ukrainian interference in the 2016 election, concluding the allegation is the most politically expedient way to defend @realDonaldTrump against #impeachment. https://washex.am/2PbkwNA @dcexaminer
NYT:
Quote:
"The Zelensky administration, Ms. Zerkal said, is most concerned about placating Mr. Trump, having decided that the impeachment inquiry will fail in the Senate and that Mr. Trump could be re-elected."
  #5853  
Old 12-03-2019, 10:47 AM
Euphonious Polemic is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 12,518
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiveyearlurker View Post
Sit back and realize that the Republican party's actual defense is that Trump was so singularly concerned about Ukrainian corruption that he enlisted the Ukrainian government to investigate corruption in the United States. In what world does this make any sense?
It makes sense in a world where Putin has enough compromat on senior Republican leaders to make it so.

Republican politicians are now fully embracing obvious Russian propaganda, and repeating it for the media. They are Russian assets.
  #5854  
Old 12-03-2019, 11:00 AM
DesertDog is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Mesa, Ariz.
Posts: 5,916
Emphasis on "ass."

Last edited by DesertDog; 12-03-2019 at 11:00 AM.
  #5855  
Old 12-03-2019, 12:21 PM
Elendil's Heir is offline
SDSAB
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: 221B Baker St.
Posts: 86,675
Robert Reich on impeachment and unpardonable offenses: https://www.newsweek.com/trump-impea...onable-1475096
  #5856  
Old 12-03-2019, 12:33 PM
Walken After Midnight is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 5,398
CNBC: Trump loses appeal to block Deutsche Bank, Capital One from handing his financial records to Congress

Trump lawyer Jay Sekulow responds:
Quote:
"We believe the subpoena is invalid as issued. In light of the Second Circuit decision, we are evaluating our next options including seeking review at the Supreme Court of the United States."
Mitt Romney breaks with Republicans:
Quote:
“I saw no evidence from our intelligence community, nor from the representatives today for the Department of State, that there is any evidence of any kind of that suggests that Ukraine interfered in our elections."
Trump wants Pompeo, Mulvaney and Rick Perry to testify, but in the Senate:
Quote:
“I want them to testify but I want them to testify in the senate where they will get a fair trial.”
  #5857  
Old 12-03-2019, 12:42 PM
Akaj's Avatar
Akaj is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: In the vanishing middle
Posts: 858
Quote:
Originally Posted by Walken After Midnight View Post
Trump wants Pompeo, Mulvaney and Rick Perry to testify, but in the Senate:
“I want them to testify but I want them to testify in the senate where they will get a fair trial.”

So he still doesn't realize that he's the one on trial?
__________________
I'm not expecting any surprises.
  #5858  
Old 12-03-2019, 12:46 PM
Happy Lendervedder's Avatar
Happy Lendervedder is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Michigan
Posts: 15,271
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elendil's Heir View Post
Robert Reich on impeachment and unpardonable offenses: https://www.newsweek.com/trump-impea...onable-1475096
I'm not a smart man, and not a Constitutional scholar by any means, but I don't think Reich is correct about that "in cases of impeachment" clause. I think it means a president can't pardon to prevent an impeachment, not that impeachment is some magical button that makes those "unpardonable offenses."

I could be wrong, but that's how I always read that.
  #5859  
Old 12-03-2019, 01:02 PM
Kolak of Twilo's Avatar
Kolak of Twilo is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Edgewater/Chicago
Posts: 3,979
Quote:
Originally Posted by Walken After Midnight View Post
...


Trump wants Pompeo, Mulvaney and Rick Perry to testify, but in the Senate:
Quote:
“I want them to testify but I want them to testify in the senate where they will get a fair trial.”
So it appears the President doesn't understand his trial in the Senate will be run by House Democrats acting as the prosecutors. Moscow Mitch won't be doing anything other than acting as a juror.

What a maroon.
  #5860  
Old 12-03-2019, 02:28 PM
Walken After Midnight is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 5,398
Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR):
Quote:
"You have to remember that the impeachment trial is also most senators’ view of purgatory or even Hell. They have to sit silently in their chair on the Senate floor, and they never get to make a speech at all."
  #5861  
Old 12-03-2019, 03:19 PM
Defensive Indifference is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 7,320
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kolak of Twilo View Post
So it appears the President doesn't understand his trial in the Senate will be run by House Democrats acting as the prosecutors. Moscow Mitch won't be doing anything other than acting as a juror.
Huh. I didn't realize that either. I have only dim memories of the Clinton impeachment. I'll probably pay more attention this time.
  #5862  
Old 12-03-2019, 03:55 PM
Sage Rat's Avatar
Sage Rat is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Howdy
Posts: 22,177
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kolak of Twilo View Post
So it appears the President doesn't understand his trial in the Senate will be run by House Democrats acting as the prosecutors. Moscow Mitch won't be doing anything other than acting as a juror.

What a maroon.
McConnell will oversee the process for creating the rules for how to conduct the trial.

Those rules will, per the Constitution, require that someone from the House is able to lead the case of the Prosecution and that Justice Roberts, nominally, run the show but they could implement a rule like that the Senate has to vote (simple majority) for whether to allow a witness to testify, which evidence to allow in trial, etc. They get to choose whether the defense or prosecution goes first. Overall, they could set things up to significantly handicap the House manager.
  #5863  
Old 12-03-2019, 04:43 PM
Snowboarder Bo's Avatar
Snowboarder Bo is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 27,609
"Founding Founders"? Really? Now we have to live that as a nation, ffs. (Page 11). You can do better than that, Mr. Schiff.
  #5864  
Old 12-03-2019, 05:02 PM
KarlGauss's Avatar
KarlGauss is online now
Entangled
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Between pole and tropic
Posts: 8,568
I liked this. Nicely worded.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Impeachment Inquiry Report
“(The President's) unprecedented campaign of obstruction of this impeachment inquiry . . .”

"“The damage to our system of checks and balances, and to the balance of power within our three branches of government, will be long-lasting and potentially irrevocable if the president’s ability to stonewall Congress goes unchecked.”

“Any future president will feel empowered to resist an investigation into their own wrongdoing, malfeasance, or corruption, and the result will be a nation at far greater risk of all three.”
  #5865  
Old 12-03-2019, 07:51 PM
simster is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 11,389
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowboarder Bo View Post
"Founding Founders"? Really? Now we have to live that as a nation, ffs. (Page 11). You can do better than that, Mr. Schiff.
If that is your only complaint - you really have nonthing at all.
  #5866  
Old 12-03-2019, 08:08 PM
Snowboarder Bo's Avatar
Snowboarder Bo is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 27,609
Quote:
Originally Posted by simster View Post
If that is your only complaint - you really have nonthing at all.
  #5867  
Old 12-03-2019, 08:15 PM
KidCharlemagne is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 5,399
I've been out of the loop of late - Why didn't Schiff call Parnas? Did the revelations about Nunes Come after the end of the hearings? Oh to watch Nunes have to sit there while Dems questioned Parnas about Nunes would just make my year.
  #5868  
Old 12-03-2019, 08:15 PM
Senegoid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Sunny California
Posts: 14,982
Quote:
Originally Posted by Happy Lendervedder View Post
I'm not a smart man, and not a Constitutional scholar by any means, but I don't think Reich is correct about that "in cases of impeachment" clause. I think it means a president can't pardon to prevent an impeachment, not that impeachment is some magical button that makes those "unpardonable offenses."
Agreed. I can't imagine Reich being right about that. Any criminal proceedings against a former president after he leaves office are entirely separate and independent of any impeachment proceedings, as best as I can make of it.

It's some nice wishful thinking, though.
__________________
=========================================

Last edited by Senegoid; 12-03-2019 at 08:15 PM.
  #5869  
Old 12-03-2019, 08:26 PM
Senegoid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Sunny California
Posts: 14,982
Quote:
Originally Posted by KidCharlemagne View Post
I've been out of the loop of late - Why didn't Schiff call Parnas? Did the revelations about Nunes Come after the end of the hearings? Oh to watch Nunes have to sit there while Dems questioned Parnas about Nunes would just make my year.
In one of these hate-Trump (not that I have a problem with that) threads, there was a link to an investigative article about the Nunes dairy farm operations in Iowa, speculating on the suspected skullduggery there and their secretiveness.

(Here it is again: Devin Nunes’s Family Farm Is Hiding a Politically Explosive Secret ETA: Ryan Lizza, Esquire, Sept. 30, 2018.)

I would also wish for Schiff to call Devin Nunes's cows. ALL of them. I think they would have some interesting moos to tell.

(The "politically explosive secret", of course, is that they probably hire undocumented farm worker. ALL the farmers in farm-country do, and everybody knows it. ETA: It's just that the Nunes family is more aggressively and threatingly secretive about it.)
__________________
=========================================

Last edited by Senegoid; 12-03-2019 at 08:30 PM.
  #5870  
Old 12-03-2019, 09:01 PM
cmosdes is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,634
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sage Rat View Post
McConnell will oversee the process for creating the rules for how to conduct the trial.

Those rules will, per the Constitution, require that someone from the House is able to lead the case of the Prosecution and that Justice Roberts, nominally, run the show but they could implement a rule like that the Senate has to vote (simple majority) for whether to allow a witness to testify, which evidence to allow in trial, etc. They get to choose whether the defense or prosecution goes first. Overall, they could set things up to significantly handicap the House manager.
Serious question. I don't see the bolded part in the constitution. Where is it? I'm guessing I'm missing it.
  #5871  
Old 12-03-2019, 09:11 PM
Moriarty's Avatar
Moriarty is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Denver, CO, USA
Posts: 2,972
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmosdes View Post
Serious question. I don't see the bolded part in the constitution. Where is it? I'm guessing I'm missing it.
The NY Times has offered a discussion of procedure. I’m not sure if it’s paywalled, but I got in without a subscription.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...t-process.html

In short, they indicate that the House (at least as it was done for Clinton) appoints “managers” to represent the House as the prosecution.

Incidentally, it also says that the Senators can ask questions. I’m not sure how “speechy” such questions can get, however.

Note that none of this is actually in the constitution.

Last edited by Moriarty; 12-03-2019 at 09:12 PM.
  #5872  
Old 12-03-2019, 10:26 PM
Sage Rat's Avatar
Sage Rat is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Howdy
Posts: 22,177
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmosdes View Post
Serious question. I don't see the bolded part in the constitution. Where is it? I'm guessing I'm missing it.
No, apparently it comes from the Senate rules. I was wrong.

But I have seen articles talking about how the rules for impeachment in the Senate, this go-round, will need to be determined and voted on.

All Senate rules can be changed but my current take is that there are some rules that the Senate generally accepts as sacred and some that are transitory, being created on the spot and then ditched. The majority of impeachment rules are in the latter bucket.

But it does seem to be that the House Management setup is an accepted rule and that it is a rule that Roberts will be the one to decide what evidence to accept reject.

It seems that McConnell's ability to hold a kangaroo court is somewhat minimized. He could get those rules changed but it's a harder push to accomplish.

Personally, I think that McConnell should be smart enough to realize that Trump will consider a second term to be a green light to start ignoring his handlers, and start destroying everything he can get his hands on. If he's not aware of that and not doing everything he can to get Trump out of the office before 2021, then Mitch is guilty of an overinflated belief in his abilities.

You can manage people who are rational. With addicts, you can manage them for a while but eventually they go nuts. Trump's addiction is headlines with his name in them (pro or con) and the rush of trying to get away with things that he's not supposed to do.
  #5873  
Old 12-03-2019, 11:04 PM
cmosdes is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,634
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moriarty View Post
The NY Times has offered a discussion of procedure. I’m not sure if it’s paywalled, but I got in without a subscription.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...t-process.html

In short, they indicate that the House (at least as it was done for Clinton) appoints “managers” to represent the House as the prosecution.

Incidentally, it also says that the Senators can ask questions. I’m not sure how “speechy” such questions can get, however.

Note that none of this is actually in the constitution.
I read the NY times article earlier because of trying to research Sage Rat's assertion. I'm aware of most of the procedures that are thought to accompany this process, but I read the constitution to see what was mandated and couldn't find where the house being manager's was specified. I thought I was missing it. Thanks for the clarification.
  #5874  
Old 12-03-2019, 11:10 PM
Walken After Midnight is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 5,398
Fox News: Devin Nunes sues CNN for $435M over ‘false and defamatory’ Ukraine story

This is about CNN reporting Lev Parnas' lawyer's statement that his client would be willing to tell Congress that Nunes met with ex-Ukrainian Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin in Vienna to get dirt on Biden. Nunes denies this happened.

From CNN:
Quote:
Nunes' complaint on Tuesday is the latest in a string of lawsuits the California Republican congressman has filed against news organizations and other entities. Nunes filed lawsuits earlier this year against the newspaper chain McClatchy, Hearst Magazines, and Twitter.

Before publishing the story and airing a TV segment about it, CNN approached Nunes twice on Capitol Hill, and reached out to him and his office for comment multiple times through his spokesman. Nunes responded to questions telling a CNN reporter, "I don't talk to you in this lifetime or the next lifetime," and reiterated later he would not acknowledge questions from CNN.
  #5875  
Old 12-04-2019, 03:22 AM
kaylasdad99 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Anaheim, CA
Posts: 32,387
Quote:
Originally Posted by Walken After Midnight View Post
Fox News: Devin Nunes sues CNN for $435M over ‘false and defamatory’ Ukraine story

This is about CNN reporting Lev Parnas' lawyer's statement that his client would be willing to tell Congress that Nunes met with ex-Ukrainian Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin in Vienna to get dirt on Biden. Nunes denies this happened.

From CNN:
Quote:
Nunes' complaint on Tuesday is the latest in a string of lawsuits the California Republican congressman has filed against news organizations and other entities. Nunes filed lawsuits earlier this year against the newspaper chain McClatchy, Hearst Magazines, and Twitter.

Before publishing the story and airing a TV segment about it, CNN approached Nunes twice on Capitol Hill, and reached out to him and his office for comment multiple times through his spokesman. Nunes responded to questions telling a CNN reporter, "I don't talk to you in this lifetime or the next lifetime," and reiterated later he would not acknowledge questions from CNN.
He can deny anything he likes. ISTM that he only has a cause of action if he intends to show that Parnas’s lawyer didn’t make the statement that CNN reported that he made.

This isn’t twitter, so I hope that his SLAPP lawsuit gets him and his legal team SLAPPed. Hard.
  #5876  
Old 12-04-2019, 04:40 AM
Senegoid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Sunny California
Posts: 14,982
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaylasdad99 View Post
He can deny anything he likes. ISTM that he only has a cause of action if he intends to show that Parnas’s lawyer didn’t make the statement that CNN reported that he made.

This isn’t twitter, so I hope that his SLAPP lawsuit gets him and his legal team SLAPPed. Hard.
I read an article a few days ago about this. Apparently, one can choose the state in which you want to file the suit. Nunes files these suits in Virginia and Iowa, states that don't have anti-SLAPP laws.

Devin Nunes Has Filed a Very Weird Lawsuit Against Ryan Lizza mentions suit in Iowa.

Devin Nunes Drops One Ridiculous Lawsuit, Only To File Another One mentions two suits in Virginia.
__________________
=========================================
  #5877  
Old 12-04-2019, 04:59 AM
Gyrate is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Greater Croydonia
Posts: 24,100
Nunes, of course, has been chatting a lot to Giuliani and Parnas, according to phone records.

But Kevin McCarthy says it's all good. Nothing to see here.
  #5878  
Old 12-04-2019, 06:55 AM
Left Hand of Dorkness's Avatar
Left Hand of Dorkness is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: at the right hand of cool
Posts: 41,804
Here's a weird question: if a person knowingly and incorrectly calls a news report "false and defamatory," does the media outlet in question have reasonable grounds for a slander suit?
  #5879  
Old 12-04-2019, 09:11 AM
Fiveyearlurker is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 6,868
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gyrate View Post
Nunes, of course, has been chatting a lot to Giuliani and Parnas, according to phone records.

But Kevin McCarthy says it's all good. Nothing to see here.
No link, but just saw on Foxnews that this only proves that Nunes' phone was connected to Parnas. We still have no evidence that Nunes spoke with Parnas.

No. Seriously. They went with that explanation.
  #5880  
Old 12-04-2019, 09:13 AM
DesertDog is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Mesa, Ariz.
Posts: 5,916
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sage Rat View Post
All Senate rules can be changed but my current take is that there are some rules that the Senate generally accepts as sacred and some that are transitory, being created on the spot and then ditched. The majority of impeachment rules are in the latter bucket.
You're forgetting how the current Senate majority leader sat on a Supreme Court appointment for over a year so "his" guy could fill the seat instead. I would have thought vetting presidential appoints expeditiously would have fallen into that bucket until a couple years ago.
  #5881  
Old 12-04-2019, 09:52 AM
Gyrate is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Greater Croydonia
Posts: 24,100
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiveyearlurker View Post
No link, but just saw on Foxnews that this only proves that Nunes' phone was connected to Parnas. We still have no evidence that Nunes spoke with Parnas.

No. Seriously. They went with that explanation.
Perhaps Nunes, Giuliani and Parnas have been buttdialing each other. Rudy's certainly got form, after all.
  #5882  
Old 12-04-2019, 09:58 AM
Sage Rat's Avatar
Sage Rat is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Howdy
Posts: 22,177
Quote:
Originally Posted by DesertDog View Post
You're forgetting how the current Senate majority leader sat on a Supreme Court appointment for over a year so "his" guy could fill the seat instead. I would have thought vetting presidential appoints expeditiously would have fallen into that bucket until a couple years ago.
Deadlines aren't a rule in anything Congress does.
  #5883  
Old 12-04-2019, 10:00 AM
Sage Rat's Avatar
Sage Rat is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Howdy
Posts: 22,177
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiveyearlurker View Post
No link, but just saw on Foxnews that this only proves that Nunes' phone was connected to Parnas. We still have no evidence that Nunes spoke with Parnas.

No. Seriously. They went with that explanation.
I, too, hate it when my cow gets on my phone with Ukrainian conmen.
  #5884  
Old 12-04-2019, 10:05 AM
BobLibDem is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Home 07 NCAA HockeyChamps
Posts: 21,858
So all the time that Nunes was playacting during the hearings, he knew full well that the phone records showed that he was talking to an already indicted conspirator in the Ukraine plot. He was just poisoning the well so that when he became implicated it might cause him less damage. He was in on it, Pence and Pompeo were in on it, and Bill Barr is still trying to get allies to throw their own intelligence agencies under the bus to back up the Ukraine conspiracy theories. Every single Republican needs to go.
  #5885  
Old 12-04-2019, 10:18 AM
Sage Rat's Avatar
Sage Rat is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Howdy
Posts: 22,177
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaylasdad99 View Post
He can deny anything he likes. ISTM that he only has a cause of action if he intends to show that Parnas’s lawyer didn’t make the statement that CNN reported that he made.

This isn’t twitter, so I hope that his SLAPP lawsuit gets him and his legal team SLAPPed. Hard.
Apparently, the TV coverage didn't condition the news on Parnas' lawyer.

I believe that I said a few pages ago that CNN was playing with fire on that one. (Though, Nunes' protestations that Parnas is a crook and that they should have known better belies the fact that Nunes' cow had a habit of calling to talk with Parnas.)

Nunes' trip was long enough that he could have made one more stop, though. We'll have to see if Parnas reveals any texts from the trip.

I feel like a judge could still hit Nunes with something, even in a no-anti-SLAPP state, if it came out that Nunes had knowingly lied when he issued the lawsuit. Perjury?

Last edited by Sage Rat; 12-04-2019 at 10:19 AM.
  #5886  
Old 12-04-2019, 10:31 AM
BobLibDem is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Home 07 NCAA HockeyChamps
Posts: 21,858
Boy I thought Jordan was a Donald Dick Sucker, but this guy Collins has him beat.
  #5887  
Old 12-04-2019, 10:41 AM
Crotalus's Avatar
Crotalus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Chillicothe, Ohio
Posts: 6,104
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobLibDem View Post
Boy I thought Jordan was a Donald Dick Sucker, but this guy Collins has him beat.
He seems to be a bit smarter than Jordan (a low bar), but his dignity and morals are about the same.
__________________
Ad hominem is a logical fallacy when it's used to argue against a concept. But it's perfectly appropriate when your point is that someone is an asshole. TonySinclair
  #5888  
Old 12-04-2019, 11:54 AM
romansperson's Avatar
romansperson is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 4,820
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiveyearlurker View Post
No link, but just saw on Foxnews that this only proves that Nunes' phone was connected to Parnas. We still have no evidence that Nunes spoke with Parnas.

No. Seriously. They went with that explanation.
I bet it was that damn cow!
  #5889  
Old 12-04-2019, 12:01 PM
Aspenglow's Avatar
Aspenglow is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 4,353
I can't listen to the Donald Dick Suckers so I just read them via captioning. But on the whole, this part of the impeachment proceedings has been much more riveting than I anticipated.

I loved Professor Karlan giving Collins a hard slap for insulting her to imply she was not ascertaining the facts in advance of the hearing.

I also loved Professor Gerhardt finally saying the most important thing that needed saying: If this is not impeachable conduct, we may as well do away with the process, because it will have been rendered meaningless.

And somehow I'm not persuaded by the Turley Golden Doodle Defense.
  #5890  
Old 12-04-2019, 12:18 PM
E-DUB's Avatar
E-DUB is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 4,892
If trump had asked the Ukrainians to divert a couple mill of that military aid into a certain numbered Swiss bank account, that would be undeniably impeachable conduct. This is worse because A.) Staying in the presidency does mean the continued ability to enrich himself at the public trough and may even be his only means of maintaining his liberty. B.) Undermining the free election process is a greater offense against the nation than simply lining one's own pockets.
  #5891  
Old 12-04-2019, 12:43 PM
BobLibDem is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Home 07 NCAA HockeyChamps
Posts: 21,858
Quote:
Originally Posted by E-DUB View Post
If trump had asked the Ukrainians to divert a couple mill of that military aid into a certain numbered Swiss bank account, that would be undeniably impeachable conduct. This is worse because A.) Staying in the presidency does mean the continued ability to enrich himself at the public trough and may even be his only means of maintaining his liberty. B.) Undermining the free election process is a greater offense against the nation than simply lining one's own pockets.
If the Swiss back scheme happened, Republicans would engage in a frenzy of accusations against whoever uncovered that conduct. He would be unmasked and hounded relentlessly the rest of his life. Not a single Republican would agree that the conduct was impeachable. NOTHING he could possible do would ever be considered impeachable by Republicans. Laws are made to protect Republicans and not bind them.
  #5892  
Old 12-04-2019, 01:40 PM
elucidator is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Further
Posts: 60,207
Quote:
Originally Posted by romansperson View Post
I bet it was that damn cow!
The question is moot.
  #5893  
Old 12-04-2019, 01:50 PM
elucidator is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Further
Posts: 60,207
That part about this being the worst Presidential misconduct? Gee, guys, I dunno. Nixon was impeached and underbussed for approximately similar levels or rotten. But Reagan/Contra? Subterfuge to sell arms to a hostile country in order to provide money for something Congress explicitly said for him not to do.

Then he stood up there and said yeppers, all the evidence is there, it happened, but that's not how he remembers it. Period. Case closed. And he skated. Scot free, zero problems, zilch, nada damn thing!

So that argument bites. Ya got ten thousand sharpened weapons and you reach for the Nerf bat?
  #5894  
Old 12-04-2019, 01:51 PM
Procrustus is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Pacific NW. ¥
Posts: 12,632
Quote:
Originally Posted by elucidator View Post
That part about this being the worst Presidential misconduct? Gee, guys, I dunno. Nixon was impeached and underbussed for approximately similar levels or rotten. But Reagan/Contra? Subterfuge to sell arms to a hostile country in order to provide money for something Congress explicitly said for him not to do.

Then he stood up there and said yeppers, all the evidence is there, it happened, but that's not how he remembers it. Period. Case closed. And he skated. Scot free, zero problems, zilch, nada damn thing!

So that argument bites. Ya got ten thousand sharpened weapons and you reach for the Nerf bat?
Nitpick. Nixon wasn’t impeached.
  #5895  
Old 12-04-2019, 02:03 PM
JKellyMap's Avatar
JKellyMap is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 9,871
“It started with tears in Brooklyn” — Rep. Doug Collins

Now I can’t get that Eric Clapton song out of my head.
  #5896  
Old 12-04-2019, 02:09 PM
Sage Rat's Avatar
Sage Rat is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Howdy
Posts: 22,177
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aspenglow View Post
And somehow I'm not persuaded by the Turley Golden Doodle Defense.
Memorable quotes have a certain strength.

Or course, the counter to that is to make sure that the strength is in infamy and that people remember it as something stupid.

As such, I'll point out that Turley's basic argument was, "People are angry."

If I'm angry at a judge for taking a bribe to give a criminal a joke sentence, is that an argument that the judge should or should not be removed from his job?
  #5897  
Old 12-04-2019, 02:10 PM
rocking chair is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: on the porch
Posts: 7,937
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiveyearlurker View Post
No link, but just saw on Foxnews that this only proves that Nunes' phone was connected to Parnas. We still have no evidence that Nunes spoke with Parnas.

No. Seriously. They went with that explanation.


it is true that phone records only show that phone nunes was connected to phone parnas.

to place human nunes and human parnas speaking to each other on said calls, you need something a bit more. something that is easily gained.

there is a very slim chance that they were not speaking to each other. that "someone else was using my phone" would be rather unbelievable. it does strain credulity that they did not speak to each other as there were 4 different calls.
  #5898  
Old 12-04-2019, 02:36 PM
Buck Godot's Avatar
Buck Godot is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: MD outside DC
Posts: 6,153
Quote:
Originally Posted by rocking chair View Post
it is true that phone records only show that phone nunes was connected to phone parnas.

to place human nunes and human parnas speaking to each other on said calls, you need something a bit more. something that is easily gained.

there is a very slim chance that they were not speaking to each other. that "someone else was using my phone" would be rather unbelievable. it does strain credulity that they did not speak to each other as there were 4 different calls.
Clinton operatives obviously picked Nunes pocket called Parnas, and then carefully replaced the phone to his pocket before he noticed it was gone, on each of those 4 separate occasions. Jeez, connect that dots sheeple!

Last edited by Buck Godot; 12-04-2019 at 02:37 PM.
  #5899  
Old 12-04-2019, 03:17 PM
Chefguy's Avatar
Chefguy is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Portlandia
Posts: 42,850
Today's Q&A with the constitutional scholars was a fascinating tutorial on the law of the land. Even the Republican shill had interesting things to say. The pubbies on the committee, of course, used their time to grandstand and sputter "but...but...Bidens!"
  #5900  
Old 12-04-2019, 03:18 PM
Left Hand of Dorkness's Avatar
Left Hand of Dorkness is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: at the right hand of cool
Posts: 41,804
Quote:
Originally Posted by elucidator View Post
The question is moot.
Puns are bad enough, but now you're riffing on cow noises? Low.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:07 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2019 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017