Jump to content

impeachment inquiry hearings thread


henrygandorf

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, hobbes2702 said:

The faux outrage from the ranking member is my favorite 

Really hope they are digging up every possible article talking about ukrainians dying because the aid was withheld and submitting them one at a time.  Watch Collins blow a gasket.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

What did Gaetz do?  I had a conference call.

Submitted Nadler’s letter when running for head of judiciary where he talked about his experience with impeachment. Then someone else chimed in and literally said “that’s a mic drop moment”. I think it was Collins

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

What did Gaetz do?  I had a conference call.

Nadler had some bullet point in his committee campaign material about being best option for the judiciary because of his experience in impeachment.  Gaetz presented it like some smoking gun that impeachment was a foregone conclusion.  His buddy from La called it a mic drop moment, which it wasnt.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

Submitted Nadler’s letter when running for head of judiciary where he talked about his experience with impeachment. Then someone else chimed in and literally said “that’s a mic drop moment”. I think it was Collins

It was Johnson.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nadler had some bullet point in his committee campaign material about being best option for the judiciary because of his experience in impeachment.  Gaetz presented it like some smoking gun that impeachment was a foregone conclusion.  His buddy from La called it a mic drop moment, which it wasnt.  

It was such an “Ok Boomer” moment.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Nadler bringing the hammer.  POTUS didn't assert privilege, so there is nothing to take to the courts.

Oops.

He's 100% right.  That's actually been a puzzler for me (as someone who regularly resists improper discovery requests).  You get the request, you assert all appropriate objections and/or privileges.  Then let the court tell you whether you need to comply or not.

Trump just said "fuck you, what are you gonna do, make me?"  Which is actually it's own terrifying rebuke of even the concept of having the rule of law.  "I'm the king.  You can't make me comply."  That's how you kill a Republic in one shot.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gym Jordan reminds me (appropriately) of the local blowhard who destroys every decent discussion by launching into a poorly-supported diatribe.  Everyone else just rolls their eyes and implicitly knows "we're done" because nobody wants to expend the effort to pin him down.  (Get it?  Pin?)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Gym Jordan reminds me (appropriately) of the local blowhard who destroys every decent discussion by launching into a poorly-supported diatribe.  Everyone else just rolls their eyes and implicitly knows "we're done" because nobody wants to expend the effort to pin him down.  (Get it?  Pin?)

i spend most of my time on the surly political board, so i'm completely unfamiliar with anyone fitting this description.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, tantric superman said:

So bizarre, this procedural process the Republicans are arguing.

If you want to testify, come testify.  If not, shut the fuck up.

You can't sit on your hands and then whine about not being able to testify.

remember, there was a group of republicans on the committee holding hearings who stormed the doors in protest over not being able to be involved in the hearings.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, hayden_horn said:

i do think my favorite piece of rhetoric that's been invented by republicans during this administration is "perjury trap." 

if we look at that term honestly, it is an acknowledgement that the administration is full of fucking liars.

Its what they did to Clinton. They caught him lying under oath about a blowjob. It was the ultimate perjury trap. And it worked. 

Now when their own tactic is used against them for even greater crimes they rail against it as some sort of negative. When it really just means they fucking lie under oath all the time and hate it when they get caught. Its so dumb. 

“Perjury trap.” Yet another modern day invention of the completely nihilistic republican party that has no problem lying and breaking the law unless it somehow hurts them.  

Edited by JimmyJames
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, elfenix said:

Donald Trump demanded a fucking bribe from the president of the Ukraine to do his fucking job. How's that not impeachable?

It’s worse than that.  Donald Trump used millions in taxpayer money and his power as president to extort a foreign government to generate bullshit propaganda intended to slander Trump’s chief political rival.  

Contrast that with Obama refusing to announce the investigation into Russian interference in 2016 so as not to create even the appearance he was meddling with the election.  

Edited by BrickHorn
  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I could be wrong, but I believe it's still true that no Federal Court has *ever* dismissed a case due to the perjury trap defense.

Also, the thing about the perjury trap is that if you don't lie, you won't commit perjury.

That's like trying to get a drug dealer off on illegal search and seizure.  Fuck all of these people and everyone who supports them.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brexit passes and Trump won’t be impeached; the question is will people riot/take to the streets when or if this happens? I could see some serious backlash to Ol Donny wriggling tree— tempers and emotions are way too high. Only saving Grace is Christmas might drown it out...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, BrickHorn said:

It’s worse than that.  Donald Trump used millions in taxpayer money and his power as president to extort a foreign government to generate bullshit propaganda intended to slander Trump’s chief political rival.  

Contrast that with Obama refusing to announce the investigation into Russian interference in 2016 so as not to create even the appearance he was meddling with the election.  

yeah but the constitution only says 'treason, bribery, or other high crimes or misdemeanors" so i'd make it easy on the republicans and put the one that's actually named.  then they won't get confused when consulting their pocket constitutions. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, TexArcher said:

I could be wrong, but I believe it's still true that no Federal Court has *ever* dismissed a case due to the perjury trap defense.

Also, the thing about the perjury trap is that if you don't lie, you won't commit perjury.

That's like trying to get a drug dealer off on illegal search and seizure.  Fuck all of these people and everyone who supports them.

Bad analogy.

I fully support exclusion of all evidence obtained by illegal searches and seizures and so should you.

It may seem a technicality, but in this day and age, the government of the US is conducting more and more illegal searches in more and more outrageous ways.  The Fourth Amendment has never been more important.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites



×
×
  • Create New...