Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

The Impeachment Thread


No Excuses

Impeachment  

198 members have voted

  1. 1. Should Donald Trump be impeached for obstruction of justice?



Recommended Posts

Considering the Republicans have the votes to acquit Trump in the Senate anyway, it seems like going the short trial-no witnesses route would be an idiotic thing to do because it would double-down on the idea that they have no interest into looking into this with good faith.  So by all means, please do that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, NoCalMike said:

Considering the Republicans have the votes to acquit Trump in the Senate anyway, it seems like going the short trial-no witnesses route would be an idiotic thing to do because it would double-down on the idea that they have no interest into looking into this with good faith.  So by all means, please do that.

 

which essentially means they would rather take that bullet than have any more damaging material come out during an actual trial

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

I’m enjoying watching the Republicans remind the Dems that the Dems need to think about what they do and remember they will one day be in the minority.  Wonder if the Republicans in the Senate will remember that sentiment.


I wonder if they remember that one day there will be a democrat president who doesn’t have to answer to a republican congress after all this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, StillUnknown said:

 

which essentially means they would rather take that bullet than have any more damaging material come out during an actual trial

 

If they deem the charges merit less then it makes sense, of course they could go the alt route of calling the Biden's and Schiff & co for a show.

 

people gonna howl either way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Springfield said:


I wonder if they remember that one day there will be a democrat president who doesn’t have to answer to a republican congress after all this.

 

Only if you believe that both sides are consistent with the rules.  

 

That boat sank in the harbor at least 10 years ago.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Larry said:

 

Only if you believe that both sides are consistent with the rules.  

 

That boat sank in the harbor at least 10 years ago.  

 

Consistency is not a trait

 

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/nadler-then-now-1998-video-impeachment


 

Quote

 

There must never be a narrowly voted impeachment or an impeachment supported by one of our major political parties and opposed by the other,” he had said before warning of dire consequences if Republicans moved on with their push.

“Such an impeachment will produce a divisiveness and bitterness in our politics for years to come and will call into question the very legitimacy of our political institutions,” he said.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, twa said:


 

Quote

“The effect of impeachment is to overturn the popular will of the voters,” Nadler said on the House floor during the Clinton impeachment hearings, in footage unearthed by Grabien. "We must not overturn an election and remove a president from office except to defend our system of government or constitutional liberties against a dire threat, and we must not do so without an overwhelming consensus of the American people.”

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, twa said:

 

If they deem the charges merit less then it makes sense, of course they could go the alt route of calling the Biden's and Schiff & co for a show.

 

people gonna howl either way.

And the top GOP dogs would be called as well...

24 minutes ago, twa said:

Please find us some of the Graham quotes from then too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you see a consensus?

 

image.png.4037dca98aaa008e2b0f38ef0907f29f.png

3 minutes ago, Skintime said:

And the top GOP dogs would be called as well...

Please find us some of the Graham quotes from then too.

 

Certainly, they were included in my first line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, NoCalMike said:

Considering the Republicans have the votes to acquit Trump in the Senate anyway, it seems like going the short trial-no witnesses route would be an idiotic thing to do because it would double-down on the idea that they have no interest into looking into this with good faith.  So by all means, please do that.

They. Don't. Care.

They could come out and hang their dicks in front of America and tell them "this is what we think of all of this" and the GOP will line up to suck them.
 

There's only one way this ends, and best be ready when those crazy ****ers light it off.

None of this is going to go away quietly.

Bet your last buck.

 

~Bang

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, twa said:

Probably changed his mind when he realized that the GOP had abandoned all morals and ethics.

1 hour ago, NoCalMike said:

Considering the Republicans have the votes to acquit Trump in the Senate anyway, it seems like going the short trial-no witnesses route would be an idiotic thing to do because it would double-down on the idea that they have no interest into looking into this with good faith.  So by all means, please do that.

I don’t know… I think that their base would love that ****. I was seriously thinking about running for Congress as a Republican. My whole platform was going to be, I will let other Republicans do whatever the **** they want. I’m not going to ****foot around it. We all know that’s what we’re doing here. I’m just going to come out and say it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Springfield said:

 

Quote

“The effect of impeachment is to overturn the popular will of the voters,” Nadler said on the House floor during the Clinton impeachment hearings, in footage unearthed by Grabien. "We must not overturn an election and remove a president from office except to defend our system of government or constitutional liberties against a dire threat, and we must not do so without an overwhelming consensus of the American people.”]

 

 

I think the whole "overturn the popular will of the voters" thing is dumb, no matter who says it. That being said in regards to the second two points Nadler made there...

 

1) I think pretty much any objective observer with a functional frontal lobe can look at the current situation with Trump and come to the conclusion that it's FAR more of a dire threat to our system of government or constitutional liberties than Clinton lying about getting a blowjob. 

 

2) There does seem to be something of a consensus of the American people in this instance. It isn't "overwhelming", but polls have consistently shown the nation split or with a slim majority wanting Trump impeached and removed from office. It's WAY higher than it was at any point during Clinton's impeachment. 
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Rdskns2000 said:

Well, if they want to die for Trump; let them.

 

They won't fight it out like Billy Badass with his .357 pretends. More likely they will anonymously firebomb churches or community centers, target Jews, Hispanics, African Americans..  you know,, sort of like they are already doing.
Maybe they learn some of those nice terrorist tactics we've been worried about coming from outsiders. A bomb beside a road or inside a market doesn't really seem like it takes a genius to plan or to pull off. 

As i have learned and stated many times; When someone threatens, you'd better listen.

I hear direct threats, and I see actions as well.
Best believe them. We are incredulous, incapable of recognizing it can happen here, and is happening here in the beginning stages. 
 

~Bang

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, Bang said:

 

They won't fight it out like Billy Badass with his .357 pretends. More likely they will anonymously firebomb churches or community centers, target Jews, Hispanics, African Americans..  you know,, sort of like they are already doing.
Maybe they learn some of those nice terrorist tactics we've been worried about coming from outsiders. A bomb beside a road or inside a market doesn't really seem like it takes a genius to plan or to pull off. 

As i have learned and stated many times; When someone threatens, you'd better listen.

I hear direct threats, and I see actions as well.
Best believe them. We are incredulous, incapable of recognizing it can happen here, and is happening here in the beginning stages. 
 

~Bang

 


They won’t do anything of substance . The whole lot of them will do what they always do; pretend like they never supported him once Fox News tells them they never supported him. Not a single one of them have the will, guts, or fortitude to do anything. Bunch of cowards looking for a handout. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Skin'emAlive said:


They won’t do anything of substance . The whole lot of them will do what they always do; pretend like they never supported him once Fox News tells them they never supported him. Not a single one of them have the will, guts, or fortitude to do anything. Bunch of cowards looking for a handout. 

How many do you think it takes?
 

Believe threats. 

 

~Bang

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...