The Trump Impeachment Inquiry

[AK84]

@Airbeck

Says who? Who is the arbiter of such things? Everything I’m seeing is about how damning this is. Sure there are those that are claiming what you say, but claims do not equal reality.

It is indeed damning. Damning thing Number 117 of the Trump era. Its going to be different from the previous 116…how?

@El_Kabong

Crow?

Just kidding.

Anyway, did I read the transcript right? In it, I seemed to read Trump asking the Ukraine to investigate his own former Ambassador, Marie Louise Yovanovitch. Perhaps I got that wrong.

I must have missed the bit in the transcript where 67 Senators, or 20 in other words GOP types decide to vote to convict.

[FlikTheBlue]

@Fiddle_Peghead

Well, sure. Hence the *half-facetious *description of my remark. The point is simply that there could be many reasons why someone doesn’t want an impeachment process to begin, and that you can’t draw conclusions that the person being impeached will necessarily be helped by it. Since no reason for why someone is against it is never offered.

I think the bulk of those who might (have) oppose(d) impeachment, including people like myself, are people who are opposed to Trump but were fearful impeachment would backfire. Many of us in that group, including me, have changed our minds.

[Aspenglow]

@FlikTheBlue

In which case we have Buttigieg and Harris as the mainstream alternates to Biden. I think either one of them would do better in a general election against Trump than Biden would, and not just because of Ukraine.

If only they were doing well in the Democratic primary. But they’re not.

[Chefguy]

@Dale_Sams

Let me get this straight…a right-wing poster is employing the “I felt threatened tactic”?

He came riding in on his horse called Trigger.

It’s amusing that in every post of his where he lambastes everyone for speculation and supposition, he follows those comments with. . .wait for it. . .speculation and supposition. Just keep fucking that dog, pal.

[Saint_Cad]

@Dale_Sams

Let me get this straight…a right-wing poster is employing the “I felt threatened tactic”?

What? Right-wingers are not entitled to safe spaces?

[wguy123]

This is the leading headline on foxnews:

“Ukraine call shows Trump pressed for Biden probe, asked about DNC server but no talk of military aid”

Big fat nothingberder. :rolleyes:

[KidCharlemagne]

@wguy123

This is the leading headline on foxnews:

“Ukraine call shows Trump pressed for Biden probe, asked about DNC server but no talk of military aid”

Big fat nothingberder. :rolleyes:

You should see Breitbart. :smack:

[Aspenglow]

@Fiddle_Peghead

I don’t disagree with this. But (excluding independents, because I don’t know exactly what that means) they would also vote for him over a perfectly reasonable Democrat.

By “soft independents,” I mean those that tacked to Obama in 2008/2012 and then to Trump in 2016.

I disagree that the American oligarchs would prefer Trump to Biden. What they want more than anything is stability in the American markets so they can continue to reliably make money. If Republicans offered even Pence or (holy grail) Romney, you’re right – they would stick with the Republicans. But Trump’s nuttiness and willingness to violate traditional norms scares them. If they have a choice between Biden and Trump, I think most of them will throw their money behind Biden. But not Warren.

Trump Republicans are a lost cause. Fortunately, they are a minority.

[Lance_Turbo]

@Saint_Cad

Maybe but

1. Sexual relations with an intern is not. Most CEOs would be fired for the same behavior.
2. The articles of impeachment was not about sex, but rather perjury to a grand jury. The same thing that got Judge Nixon convicted a decade before.

But thank you for the great example of a strawman fallacy.

1. Is probably false. Do you have any examples that might convince me that it’s true.

2. Is bullshit. The senators who voted to convict Judge Nixon probably didn’t even bother to read the articles of impeachment before they voted overwhelmingly (89 to 9) to convict because he was in prison at the time.

[Euphonious_Polemic]

@AK84

It is indeed damning. Damning thing Number 117 of the Trump era. Its going to be different from the previous 116…how?

I must have missed the bit in the transcript where 67 Senators, or 20 in other words GOP types decide to vote to convict.

I admit to being a little confused by this.

I personally was not expecting to wake up today to a headline that said “20 GOP Senators will vote to convict”. This is day 1. Why would we expect the end game to occur NOW?

[wguy123]

@KidCharlemagne

You should see Breitbart. :smack:

Good god! That’s why I don’t look at Derp-State-Breitbart.

[Euphonious_Polemic]

@wguy123

This is the leading headline on foxnews:

“Ukraine call shows Trump pressed for Biden probe, asked about DNC server but no talk of military aid”

Big fat nothingberder. :rolleyes:

I guess they mean the military aid that Trump cancelled the week before the call. Ya, that was just a coincidence…

[wguy123]

@Euphonious_Polemic

I guess they mean the military aid that Trump cancelled the week before the call. Ya, that was just a coincidence…

Since this was just a “memorandum of a telephone conversation” and not an actual transcription, I’m guessing some items might’ve been omitted since they are super-nothingberder.

[Saint_Cad]

@ElvisL1ves

It’s the notion that there can be no legitimate, country-before-party reason to do it, which is based on the Republicans’ own reason for doing it to Clinton. Their own impeachment effort failed and backfired because it was based on spite - they first decided to do it and then looked for a justification.

I disagree with that assessment. It was not because of spite, it was that Slick Willy got away with everything. Remember his ridiculous self-aggrandizing DNC speech in 1988 that was fodder for late-night comedy? Neither did anyone else in 1992. Remember Gennifer Flowers. He had an affair with her, lied about it and no one cared that he was morally bankrupt. Same with the Lewenski affair. Same with talking privately with the Attorney General about the investigation into his wife. Bill Clinton could be revealed to be a serial rapist that shoots his victims in the face as he climaxes and most of the American public would be “Meh. Whatever floats his boat.”

[Dale_Sams]

@Fiddle_Peghead

Well, sure. Hence the *half-facetious *description of my remark. The point is simply that there could be many reasons why someone doesn’t want an impeachment process to begin, and that you can’t draw conclusions that the person being impeached will necessarily be helped by it. Since no reason for why someone is against it is never offered.

Ahh. i conflated it with your point about “People don’t want to have to hear about it day in and day out”. Which I think is true.

Also…has “Can this all be wrapped up before the election” and “How will it affect campaigning” been covered?

[FlikTheBlue]

@Aspenglow

If only they were doing well in the Democratic primary. But they’re not.

One of them would probably pull into a close second to Warren if Biden were to drop out.

[Dale_Sams]

@Euphonious_Polemic

I admit to being a little confused by this.

I personally was not expecting to wake up today to a headline that said “20 GOP Senators will vote to convict”. This is day 1. Why would we expect the end game to occur NOW?

We’re living in an Abrams pilot. Gotta set up the mystery box.

[Annoyed]

@Fiddle_Peghead

Can you not at least accept the possibility that Trump is an aberration? That in fact, someone like him is so rare in modern American politics that it just might not work the second time around. You have to go back to the 19th century to find such insults that Trump spews out being used on a regular basis in presidential elections. And this is in addition to your false assumption that is points are “genuine”. They are in fact bullshit most of the time. Have you not heard and seen the same rallies as I have?

The ones that are full to capacity and overflow every single time? Yep, it’s a machine.

[ElvisL1ves]

@Saint_Cad

I disagree with that assessment. It was not because of spite, it was that Slick Willy got away with everything.

Except they couldn’t actually come up with anything until Starr manufactured it, could they? Even the entire rest of your post is all bile, not fact. Your assessment of his character is your premise, not your conclusion. Comparisons to the Trump situation are pretty stark.

[FlikTheBlue]

@Saint_Cad

I disagree with that assessment. It was not because of spite, it was that Slick Willy got away with everything. Remember his ridiculous self-aggrandizing DNC speech in 1988 that was fodder for late-night comedy? Neither did anyone else in 1992. Remember Gennifer Flowers. He had an affair with her, lied about it and no one cared that he was morally bankrupt. Same with the Lewenski affair. Same with talking privately with the Attorney General about the investigation into his wife. Bill Clinton could be revealed to be a serial rapist that shoots his victims in the face as he climaxes and most of the American public would be “Meh. Whatever floats his boat.”

And this is why his wife handily won the 2016 election agains Trump. Oh wait, that didn’t happen.