Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins
Forum Rules and Guidelines

The Impeachment Thread Part Deux

Cooked Crack

By Cooked Crack
in The Tailgate

What do you think will happen?  

57 members have voted

  1. 1. What do you think will happen?

    • Impeachment but not conviction
      27
    • Impeachment and conviction 👀
      10
    • Impeachment fails
      11
    • Impeachment is never brought up
      9

This poll is closed to new votes

  • Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.
  • Poll closed on 01/20/2021 at 05:00 PM

Recommended Posts

No Excuses

No Excuses

Posted
Posted
12 minutes ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

I don’t get why they aren’t using some of the GOP videos against them. Like the one going around where Graham (I think) saying you can impeach post-presidents. Or them describing Trump in 2016.  


This assumes that the GOP is capable of feeling shame, which they have absolutely made clear is a concept unfamiliar to them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Llevron

Llevron

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

 

Could at least make the Trump-wing of the voter block mad at them for saying the negative things about him.

 

I think if they really wanna pull the upset, they plan to first sell a good argument and second not temp the Republicans into petty childishness by ignoring their own guilt. If they put the Republicans and Trump on the same side, they will vote that way. 

 

I think its misguided but I bet thats what they are doing. I was thinking the same thing yesterday so I had a day to sleep on it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Die Hard

Die Hard

Posted
Posted
59 minutes ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

 

Could at least make the Trump-wing of the voter block mad at them for saying the negative things about him.

 

Don't you get it?!

 

You don't get to tell them what to think. That is Trump's job.

 

If you aren't Trump.... you are not even on their frequency.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NoCalMike

NoCalMike

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, No Excuses said:

Ted Liu made a great point. The danger isn’t Trump running again in 2024. It’s Trump running again and losing, and inciting even more violence. He is a uniquely dangerous threat to this country due to his cult following and his own personality disorders.

 

I was actually thinking about this the other night.  With everything that has gone on the last two months, what would happen if Trump ran again in 2024 and lost.  Now imagine if that election was even closer in electoral college votes.   His cultists already believe him losing at all under any circumstances is impossible so imagine the reaction if/when it happens again in four years. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NoCalMike

NoCalMike

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Destino said:

Someone remind me why this trial didn’t have witnesses?  Is this an expediency thing again, because that would be really stupid.  

 

I don't understand this at all either.  Is this something the Dems were forced to agree to in order to get the trial going? If not.....how do you not call to the stand every single rioter currently in custody that is willing to say they acted upon the words of Trump.  There are *plenty* of them ready and willing to do that, especially if they think it will reduce their own consequences. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
balki1867

balki1867

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, Destino said:

Someone remind me why this trial didn’t have witnesses?  Is this an expediency thing again, because that would be really stupid.  

 

I thought these were the opening arguments. I believe they will vote on witnesses later, which would likely pass if the Democrats want it to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Momma There Goes That Man

Momma There Goes That Man

Posted
Posted
17 minutes ago, NoCalMike said:

 

I don't understand this at all either.  Is this something the Dems were forced to agree to in order to get the trial going? If not.....how do you not call to the stand every single rioter currently in custody that is willing to say they acted upon the words of Trump.  There are *plenty* of them ready and willing to do that, especially if they think it will reduce their own consequences. 


i would be very cautious about putting Trump loving maga supporters on the stand. Sure they’ll tell law enforcement it’s Trump’s fault to help themselves but that’s not the same at all as going into an impeachment trial and blaming their beloved hero, speaking out against him, and hurting him directly in a trial 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Burgold

Burgold

Posted
Posted
49 minutes ago, Destino said:

Someone remind me why this trial didn’t have witnesses?  Is this an expediency thing again, because that would be really stupid.  

Technically, these are the opening arguments. After both sides conclude, the Senate decides if they require witnesses. 
 

My guess is both sides say “no.”  The Republicans because they’re probably terrified of what witnesses would say. Dems because they feel their case is made and witnesses won’t help change Republicans’ minds. 
 

I think witnesses would be valuable. ESP. Trump and Pence. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
LD0506

LD0506

Posted
Posted
8 hours ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

Maybe I'm just tired and frustrated.  I don't know.  I do find myself actually against many of the things that the Dems push for.  They got my vote this time because of the existential threat that was Trump and his ilk.  I don't know that it will become a regular thing though.  I agree there are many things that have been left undone for so long that it has become a huge mess.  But many of these things I don't agree with the Dems path or see them not doing anything about it either.  This is not intended to be a "both sides" point because I know the GOP is far worse but the Dems seem full of the career politicians also and all the negative connotations that comes with that.  But this isn't a "why I don't like the Left" thread so we should probably wind down this derail.

 

Didn't want to glom up too much bandwidth so I just grabbed this bit. 

 

I hear ya, I honestly do. I don't know what the hell I am these days but when I make a list political parties aren't on it. And yes, there are a lot of loopy, loony leftys floating around playing with their vuvuzelas day and night, and I am lucky enough that I've learned to tune them out but I won't deny that they are there.

 

If I have to claim any political philosophy or theology, I'd probably state it along the lines of "What the **** is wrong with you people? Just stop being assholes!" It gets tiresome to wade through all the rhetoric and soundbites and tweets that are all noise, no substance. Too many waste too much time and effort on **** that doesn't benefit them (or anyone else) one iota. WTF?

 

BUT......if we both see that a problem exists, both agree that something needs to be done, and you don't, for whatever reason, bring your input to it, then you become this self-fulfilling prophecy of being disappointed with the results.

 

E pluribus unum

 

Got lotsa pluribus but seems we misplaced the unum

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
PokerPacker

PokerPacker

Posted
Posted
5 hours ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

I don’t get why they aren’t using some of the GOP videos against them. Like the one going around where Graham (I think) saying you can impeach post-presidents. Or them describing Trump in 2016.  

You're right, Lindsay Graham would never say something on video and then do the opposite shortly thereafter.  In other news, good thing Merrick Garland finally got that Supreme Court seat that they left open after RBG died.

32 minutes ago, Burgold said:

Technically, these are the opening arguments. After both sides conclude, the Senate decides if they require witnesses. 
 

My guess is both sides say “no.”  The Republicans because they’re probably terrified of what witnesses would say. Dems because they feel their case is made and witnesses won’t help change Republicans’ minds. 
 

I think witnesses would be valuable. ESP. Trump and Pence. 

He's not getting convicted.  Like with the first impeachment, the goal should be to use the stage to show the American people who these cretins truly are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Burgold

Burgold

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, PokerPacker said:

 

He's not getting convicted.  Like with the first impeachment, the goal should be to use the stage to show the American people who these cretins truly are.

I'd be shocked if the Republicans did the right thing. I'd be more than shocked.

 

Right now, my framing of the question is... are there 17 Republicans sitting in the Senate who are not traitors to the United States of America? If I had to place a wager I'd say the answer is not only "no," but the kind of controllable laughing fit that causes injury.

It is more likely that a Vinny Cerrato assembled football team coached by Jim Zorn and Joe Barry win five consecutive Super Bowls than the Republican Party does the right thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Destino

Destino

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Burgold said:

Technically, these are the opening arguments. After both sides conclude, the Senate decides if they require witnesses. 
 

My guess is both sides say “no.”  The Republicans because they’re probably terrified of what witnesses would say. Dems because they feel their case is made and witnesses won’t help change Republicans’ minds. 
 

I think witnesses would be valuable. ESP. Trump and Pence. 

A bunch of elected leaders narrating over tweets is never as compelling as witness testimony.  Especially witnesses that Trump can no longer block as a former president.  I want to hear from National guardsmen and what orders they received,  I want to hear from the former defense Secretary and what happened in the meeting on Jan 5 and why he changed the rules for the national guard,  I want every aspect of this examined.  
 

if they just rest and move on because of this “need to heal” bull****, they’ll deserve the loss they suffer in two years.  The fight doesn’t end when you get in power, and this is the mistake the Obama years should have taught democrats all too well.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Larry

Larry

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, NoCalMike said:

 

I don't understand this at all either.  Is this something the Dems were forced to agree to in order to get the trial going? If not.....how do you not call to the stand every single rioter currently in custody that is willing to say they acted upon the words of Trump.  There are *plenty* of them ready and willing to do that, especially if they think it will reduce their own consequences. 

 

How credible do you think one of the yahoos in jail would be?  And how much of a chance to turn questioning into a **** show?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Larry

Larry

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Burgold said:

I'd be shocked if the Republicans did the right thing. I'd be more than shocked.

 

There is zero chance that any Senate Republicans do the Right Thing.  

 

I'm surprised more of them aren't doing political calculation that convicting Trump is to their political advantage.  Which I suppose might count as doing the right thing for an evil reason.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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