|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Feb 8, 2021 12:27:57 GMT -8
I don't get it. It's clear, more or less, that the goal of the Democrats in their second impeachment effort
is to prevent Trump from running in 2024. This makes no sense.
No doubt many millions would vote for him again if he got the nomination. On the other hand, that's just what the Dems should want to happen. He is NOT going to win in '24.
Biden will NOT run in '24, as everybody knows. Trump would just split the GOP as he did this last year, making it a near certainty that even a lousy Dem candidate will win. That means 3 straight Dem terms in the White House (re-election of an incumbent is not impossible but difficult), which should be enough time for the Left to stack the deck so heavily that the GOP will not win the Presidency until (if ever) after mid-century.
In any case, the Dems should be encouraging Trump to run in 2024.
I am not sure that he will even run. A lot can happen in four years. Trump will be 78 years old in 2024. His health may fail. Or his wife may rebel. Or one of his kids will run instead of Pop. Or the GOP may nominate someone else. (Which would have happened in '16 if such things were still decided in smoky backrooms by party insiders.)
By trying so hard to prevent Trump from running, the Democrats are signaling that they really fear him politically. As I have explained, that have no reason to fear Candidate Trump. Quite the contrary.
AzWm
PS: I should also mention the obvious fact that the voters of America should decide who will run for the White House (i.e., primaries). By eliminating the possibility of Trump's running in '24, the Dems would be doing what is routinely done in very bad places, such as Iran. The spiritual leader of that nation gets to approve or bar candidates. Is that what we want?
|
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Feb 8, 2021 13:24:54 GMT -8
I don't get it. It's clear, more or less, that the goal of the Democrats in their second impeachment effort
is to prevent Trump from running in 2024. This makes no sense.
No doubt many millions would vote for him again if he got the nomination. On the other hand, that's just what the Dems should want to happen. He is NOT going to win in '24.
Biden will NOT run in '24, as everybody knows. Trump would just split the GOP as he did this last year, making it a near certainty that even a lousy Dem candidate will win. That means 3 straight Dem terms in the White House (re-election of an incumbent is not impossible but difficult), which should be enough time for the Left to stack the deck so heavily that the GOP will not win the Presidency until (if ever) after mid-century.
In any case, the Dems should be encouraging Trump to run in 2024.
I am not sure that he will even run. A lot can happen in four years. Trump will be 78 years old in 2024. His health may fail. Or his wife may rebel. Or one of his kids will run instead of Pop. Or the GOP will nominate someone else. (Which would have happened in '16 if such things were still decided in smoky backrooms by party insiders.)
By trying so hard to prevent Trump from running, the Democrats are signaling that they really fear him politically. As I have explained, that have no reason to fear Candidate Trump. Quite the contrary.
AzWmPS: I should also mention the obvious fact that the voters of America should decide who will run for the White House (i.e., primaries). By eliminating the possibility of Trump's running in '24, the Dems would be doing what is routinely done in very bad places, such as Iran. The spiritual leader of that nation gets to approve or bar candidates. Is that what we want? I don't even know where to begin here. A) Preventing him from running again is a matter of principle. No candidate who was impeached twice (for the gravest of offenses) should be allowed to seek re-election. A simple and easy non-starter. He's the most influential person in the entire party. Read between the lines and you will see how terrified Republicans are of losing his supporters/alienating the base. It's everywhere, from McCarthy and McConnell to Brooks, Greene and Boebert. The party IS him. What you're proposing is insane. Nobody should be encouraging him to do anything except flee the country. I have no idea where you construct these narratives, but they aren't reality. Trumpism should be feared, which is another reason why he needs to be prosecuted at the state level. |
|
|
|
Post by Al-O-Meter on Feb 8, 2021 14:02:23 GMT -8
I don't get it. It's clear, more or less, that the goal of the Democrats in their second impeachment effort is to prevent Trump from running in 2024. This makes no sense. The goal is only to get some camera-time and viral moments for some prominent Democrats. The excuse of wanting to prevent Trump from running in 2024 isn't true. 1) The text of the US Constitution does not give the Senate the power to hold a trial of a citizen who is not in political office. 2) There is no precedent for the Senate convicting a former President in an impeachment trial. 3) Given the number of Senators who have signaled their intention to follow the letter of the law in the US Constitution, there is no chance Trump will be convicted. 4) Given there is zero chance Trump will be convicted, there is also zero chance the Senate can vote to bar him from seeking office. The excuses are just excuses and this whole thing is nothing but theater for the barking seals in the Democrat base. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Feb 8, 2021 15:08:45 GMT -8
I don't get it. It's clear, more or less, that the goal of the Democrats in their second impeachment effort is to prevent Trump from running in 2024. This makes no sense. The goal is only to get some camera-time and viral moments for some prominent Democrats. The excuse of wanting to prevent Trump from running in 2024 isn't true. 1) The text of the US Constitution does not give the Senate the power to hold a trial of a citizen who is not in political office. 2) There is no precedent for the Senate convicting a former President in an impeachment trial. 3) Given the number of Senators who have signaled their intention to follow the letter of the law in the US Constitution, there is no chance Trump will be convicted. 4) Given there is zero chance Trump will be convicted, there is also zero chance the Senate can vote to bar him from seeking office. The excuses are just excuses and this whole thing is nothing but theater for the barking seals in the Democrat base. Without the Trump life-sucking spin : The goal is to establish accountability and make the Republican cowardice be out in the open. The flip-flopping, lies and mental gymnastics cease when you have to answer the simple question of "Did the president incite insurrection?" We know he did, because it was broadcast on national television, planned for weeks, with money directly tied to the Trump administration used to do so. The secret meetings at Trump's hotel which included dozens of people to coordinate the rally, confirmed by people in the inner circle. The impeachment proceeding began while the president was in office. We know this because it was voted on a whole week before the inauguration. There is absolutely nothing that isn't clear about that. It's an absolute lie to state otherwise. Mitch McConnell's obstruction prevented the Senate from convening earlier. We know this because he said so, repeatedly. It's absolutely pathetic to try and disingenuously promote a list of falsehoods like this. There is absolutely historical precedent (which isn't a requirement, anyway) and hugging the Constitution to shirk the duties of the office doesn't change the responsibilities of said office. We are literally debating insurrection like it's an optional offense. If there is ANY, even microscopic fibers, connecting the two principles together, it is the easiest vote in the history of the country. But we have more than three dozen Republicans in the Senate who only care about carrying the water of the former president and don't give one ounce of care for the truth. It's disgraceful, it's treasonous and it's a black mark on the entire GOP, which is now the Trump party. |
|
|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Feb 8, 2021 15:19:01 GMT -8
I don't get it. It's clear, more or less, that the goal of the Democrats in their second impeachment effort
is to prevent Trump from running in 2024. This makes no sense.
No doubt many millions would vote for him again if he got the nomination. On the other hand, that's just what the Dems should want to happen. He is NOT going to win in '24.
Biden will NOT run in '24, as everybody knows. Trump would just split the GOP as he did this last year, making it a near certainty that even a lousy Dem candidate will win. That means 3 straight Dem terms in the White House (re-election of an incumbent is not impossible but difficult), which should be enough time for the Left to stack the deck so heavily that the GOP will not win the Presidency until (if ever) after mid-century.
In any case, the Dems should be encouraging Trump to run in 2024.
I am not sure that he will even run. A lot can happen in four years. Trump will be 78 years old in 2024. His health may fail. Or his wife may rebel. Or one of his kids will run instead of Pop. Or the GOP will nominate someone else. (Which would have happened in '16 if such things were still decided in smoky backrooms by party insiders.)
By trying so hard to prevent Trump from running, the Democrats are signaling that they really fear him politically. As I have explained, that have no reason to fear Candidate Trump. Quite the contrary.
AzWmPS: I should also mention the obvious fact that the voters of America should decide who will run for the White House (i.e., primaries). By eliminating the possibility of Trump's running in '24, the Dems would be doing what is routinely done in very bad places, such as Iran. The spiritual leader of that nation gets to approve or bar candidates. Is that what we want? I don't even know where to begin here. A) Preventing him from running again is a matter of principle. No candidate who was impeached twice (for the gravest of offenses) should be allowed to seek re-election. A simple and easy non-starter. He's the most influential person in the entire party. Read between the lines and you will see how terrified Republicans are of losing his supporters/alienating the base. It's everywhere, from McCarthy and McConnell to Brooks, Greene and Boebert. The party IS him. What you're proposing is insane. Nobody should be encouraging him to do anything except flee the country. I have no idea where you construct these narratives, but they aren't reality. Trumpism should be feared, which is another reason why he needs to be prosecuted at the state level.
I stand by my analysis of today's political situation.
A matter of principle? You cannot be serious. The Democrats (I refer to office holders, party apparatchiks, and fellow-travelers) are dishonest hypocrites who consider winning political power the road to very big financial rewards. Well, that is largely how I see just about all politicians. Again, I remind you that I became Libertarian as a reaction against BOTH major political parties.
The Democrat hatred of Donald Trump is due to their seeing him as a rival for political power. But their hatred has made them see Trump as a giant rampaging through DC as the Godzillas rampage through Tokyo in countless Japanese monster movies. Trump is not without followers, but Godzilla he is not. He is neither smart enough nor polished enough even to make a half-hearted attempt to seize national power. And, mark my words, his brand will weaken steadily. Its half life is many 18 months or two years. It will not age well, especially with most of the media continuously throwing garbage at the man.
If the Dems were REALLY smart, they would realize that Trump tends to split off many traditional GOP voters, as well as many independents. And to repeat what I posted earlier today, I doubt that DJT will be a candidate in '24. If the next election were in two years, maybe. In four years? Too many imponderables will come into play.
But, if he were a candidate, he would absolutely help the Democrats. They cannot understand that. Trump is waiting to do another Truman, holding up a newspaper with the headline: Trump acquitted AGAIN.
I must take issue with something that you hint at but are, perhaps, not brave enough to say in so many words. In short, there is a whiff of the the current effort to brand everyone who voted for Trump a racist, homophobe, white-supremacist, etc. If we are to arrive at a point at which we concede that people who disagree with us merely have a different opinion, it can start with an effort not to claim that the opposition is unworthy of respect or toleration.
AzWm
|
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Feb 8, 2021 15:54:47 GMT -8
I don't even know where to begin here. A) Preventing him from running again is a matter of principle. No candidate who was impeached twice (for the gravest of offenses) should be allowed to seek re-election. A simple and easy non-starter. He's the most influential person in the entire party. Read between the lines and you will see how terrified Republicans are of losing his supporters/alienating the base. It's everywhere, from McCarthy and McConnell to Brooks, Greene and Boebert. The party IS him. What you're proposing is insane. Nobody should be encouraging him to do anything except flee the country. I have no idea where you construct these narratives, but they aren't reality. Trumpism should be feared, which is another reason why he needs to be prosecuted at the state level.
I stand by my analysis of today's political situation.
A matter of principle? You cannot be serious. The Democrats (I refer to office holders, party apparatchiks, and fellow-travelers) are dishonest hypocrites who consider winning political power the road to very big financial rewards. Well, that is largely how I see just about all politicians. Again, I remind you that I became Libertarian as a reaction against BOTH major political parties.
The Democrat hatred of Donald Trump is due to their seeing him as a rival for political power. But their hatred has made them see Trump as a giant rampaging through DC as the Godzillas rampage through Tokyo in countless Japanese monster movies. Trump is not without followers, but Godzilla he is not. He is neither smart enough nor polished enough even to make a half-hearted attempt to seize national power. And, mark my words, his brand will weaken steadily. Its half life is many 18 months or two years. It will not age well, especially with most of the media continuously throwing garbage at the man.
If the Dems were REALLY smart, they would realize that Trump tends to split off many traditional GOP voters, as well as many independents. And to repeat what I posted earlier today, I doubt that DJT will be a candidate in '24. If the next election were in two years, maybe. In four years? Too many imponderables will come into play.
But, if he were a candidate, he would absolutely help the Democrats. They cannot understand that. Trump is waiting to do another Truman, holding up a newspaper with the headline: Trump acquitted AGAIN.
I must take issue with something that you hint at but are, perhaps, not brave enough to say in so many words. In short, there is a whiff of the the current effort to brand everyone who voted for Trump a racist, homophobe, white-supremacist, etc. If we are to arrive at a point at which we concede that people who disagree with us merely have a different opinion, it can start with an effort not to claim that the opposition is unworthy of respect or toleration.
AzWm
I'm reliable because I try to tell the truth and I observe the political landscape through a wide and dynamic lens that focuses on bigger picture issues. You are severely and dramatically underestimating Trump's influence in the party. Massively. There's a reason why the Republicans did absolutely NOTHING when Marjorie Taylor Greene's comments were exposed. They wouldn't even entertain removing her from commitees. Why? Because she has the full backing and support of Donald Trump. Trump has already threatened multiple members of his own party if they come out against him, in impeachment or other means. They are afraid, point blank. Ask Ted Cruz. I literally have no clue why you think the movement will lose steam. Nothing indicates that. If that were true, Republicans would vote to impeach, as they would have nothing to fear from the wrath of the former president. You have Ronna McDaniel (niece of Mitt Romney) coming out today again begging Democrats to not play "political games" and crying again for party unity. There is NO unity without ACCOUNTABILITY first. Period, full stop. Not optional. Hurl insults at Democrats, whatever you want to do...But there is one party who isn't trying to pretend that January 6th was an illusion we should just "get over." It isn't the Republicans. |
|
|
|
Post by uwphoto on Feb 8, 2021 16:08:53 GMT -8
Ryan, you are nothing if not reliable.
I stand by my analysis of today's political situation.
A matter of principle? You cannot be serious. The Democrats (I refer to office holders, party apparatchiks, and fellow-travelers) are dishonest hypocrites who consider winning political power the road to very big financial rewards. Well, that is largely how I see just about all politicians. Again, I remind you that I became Libertarian as a reaction against BOTH major political parties.
The Democrat hatred of Donald Trump is due to their seeing him as a rival for political power. But their hatred has made them see Trump as a giant rampaging through DC as the Godzillas rampage through Tokyo in countless Japanese monster movies. Trump is not without followers, but Godzilla he is not. He is neither smart enough nor polished enough even to make a half-hearted attempt to seize national power. And, mark my words, his brand will weaken steadily. Its half life is many 18 months or two years. It will not age well, especially with most of the media continuously throwing garbage at the man.
If the Dems were REALLY smart, they would realize that Trump tends to split off many traditional GOP voters, as well as many independents. And to repeat what I posted earlier today, I doubt that DJT will be a candidate in '24. If the next election were in two years, maybe. In four years? Too many imponderables will come into play.
But, if he were a candidate, he would absolutely help the Democrats. They cannot understand that. Trump is waiting to do another Truman, holding up a newspaper with the headline: Trump acquitted AGAIN.
I must take issue with something that you hint at but are, perhaps, not brave enough to say in so many words. In short, there is a whiff of the the current effort to brand everyone who voted for Trump a racist, homophobe, white-supremacist, etc. If we are to arrive at a point at which we concede that people who disagree with us merely have a different opinion, it can start with an effort not to claim that the opposition is unworthy of respect or toleration.
AzWm
I'm reliable because I try to tell the truth and I observe the political landscape through a wide and dynamic lens that focuses on bigger picture issues. You are severely and dramatically underestimating Trump's influence in the party. Massively. There's a reason why the Republicans did absolutely NOTHING when Marjorie Taylor Greene's comments were exposed. They wouldn't even entertain removing her from commitees. Why? Because she has the full backing and support of Donald Trump. Trump has already threatened multiple members of his own party if they come out against him, in impeachment or other means. They are afraid, point blank. Ask Ted Cruz. I literally have no clue why you think the movement will lose steam. Nothing indicates that. If that were true, Republicans would vote to impeach, as they would have nothing to fear from the wrath of the former president. You have Ronna McDaniel (niece of Mitt Romney) coming out today again begging Democrats to not play "political games" and crying again for party unity. There is NO unity without ACCOUNTABILITY first. Period, full stop. Not optional. Hurl insults at Democrats, whatever you want to do...But there is one party who isn't trying to pretend that January 6th was an illusion we should just "get over." It isn't the Republicans. Yes, trump took a great big $#!+ in the punch bowl and it exploded. The gymnastics of the Republicans trying to not get any on them is just despicable. William, do we have to go over what happened on January 6th for you? The Republicans want to walk away like nothing happened..they don't even want to look at it! You do nothing about January 6 and it just becomes a rehearsal. The depths of darkness that America was taken from 2016 to 2020 is incredible. Im surprised we even survived it...if we do. |
|
|
|
Post by Al-O-Meter on Feb 8, 2021 16:10:40 GMT -8
The flip-flopping, lies and mental gymnastics cease when you have to answer the simple question of "Did the president incite insurrection?" Of course he didn't. Incitement is a crime with a clear legal standard. If Trump's detractors thought Trump was actually guilty of incitement they'd be indicting him in a criminal court, but they are all lawyers and know Trump's actions don't meet the necessary requirements of incitement. The whole reason they've chosen to put on this show impeachment of a citizen is because they all know Trump, as a matter of law, did not incite an insurrection. The impeachment trial is the proof you are wrong. |
|
|
|
Post by uwphoto on Feb 8, 2021 16:28:26 GMT -8
The flip-flopping, lies and mental gymnastics cease when you have to answer the simple question of "Did the president incite insurrection?" Of course he didn't. Incitement is a crime with a clear legal standard. If Trump's detractors thought Trump was actually guilty of incitement they'd be indicting him in a criminal court, but they are all lawyers and know Trump's actions don't meet the necessary requirements of incitement. The whole reason they've chosen to put on this show impeachment of a citizen is because they all know Trump, as a matter of law, did not incite an insurrection. The impeachment trial is the proof you are wrong. Uh, A bunch of the insurrectionists said they went in because trump told them to. Why would they say that? I thought you are always getting upset because elitists (like me) look down on these people. Well now I've seen the light and I realize they are very smart and make clear decisions. |
|
|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Feb 8, 2021 17:30:56 GMT -8
I do not for a second dismiss the importance of the events of Jan 6th. Many of those who took part are being arrested and will be indicted, as they should be. One hopes that all who broke the law will similarly be arrested.
But, on the other hand, I refuse to blow Jan. 6th out of proportion.
* Even if there had been a highly organized effort to take over the U.S. government, it would have failed utterly. (Look at the comical photos of some of those doofuses who invaded the Capitol and then explain how they resemble a highly trained American version of the Waffen SS!)
* Even if a number of elected officials had been killed, there would have been no take-over by Trump supporters or anyone else.
* Even if third plane had hit the Capitol on 9/11, U.S. government would not have fallen. That would have been a blow to our Republic much greater than anything since 1861. Even so, the Republic would would have survived.
We all know what some politicians think of a crisis. It shouldn't be allowed to go to waste. Talk about cynicism!!!!
It's clear to me, at least, that the Left in general is intent on using this riot by a relatively small number of thick-headed protesters as a means of seriously damaging their political opponents.
And that brings us to the current impeachment. Another attempt to not let a crisis go to waste. Except I do not see the crisis. The Democrats control everything except the Supreme Court, even though in the House and Senate that control is tenuous to say the least. And Donald Trump is in Florida. Waiting to laugh at the Dems when he is, once again, acquitted.
But, but, but . . . they almost overthrew the government!!!!! No, they did not, as everyone with an IQ above that of an eel knows. Even if they had come close to achieving that, the event would not justify the attempt by the Left to use the power of the federal government to crush citizens with whom they disagree. Apparently, it is now a federal crime to claim that the election was stolen by the Democrats. This is police state stuff, and no honest person, no matter how much he hates Donald Trump, should fail to recognize that.
AzWm
.
|
|
|
|
Post by uwphoto on Feb 8, 2021 17:36:09 GMT -8
I do not for a second dismiss the importance of the events of Jan 6th. Many of those who took part are being arrested and will be indicted, as they should be. One hopes that all who broke the law will similarly be arrested.
But, on the other hand, I refuse to blow Jan. 6th out of proportion.
* Even if there had been a highly organized effort to take over the U.S. government, it would have failed utterly. (Look at the comical photos of some of those doofuses who invaded the Capitol and then explain how they resemble a highly trained American version of the Waffen SS!)
* Even if a number of elected officials had been killed, there would have been no take-over by Trump supporters or anyone else.
* Even if third plane had hit the Capitol on 9/11, U.S. government would not have fallen. That would have been a blow to our Republic much greater than anything since 1861. Even so, the Republic would would have survived.
We all know what some politicians think of a crisis. It shouldn't be allowed to go to waste. Talk about cynicism!!!!
It's clear to me, at least, that the Left in general is intent on using this riot by a relatively small number of thick-headed protesters as a means of seriously damaging their political opponents.
And that brings us to the current impeachment. Another attempt to not let a crisis go to waste. Except I do not see the crisis. The Democrats control everything except the Supreme Court, even though in the House and Senate that control is tenuous to say the least. And Donald Trump is in Florida. Waiting to laugh at the Dems when he is, once again, acquitted.
But, but, but . . . they almost overthrew the government!!!!! No, they did not, as everyone with an IQ above that of an eel knows. Even if they had come close to achieving that, the event would not justify the attempt by the Left to use the power of the federal government to crush citizens with whom they disagree. Apparently, it is now a federal crime to claim that the election was stolen by the Democrats. This is police state stuff, and no honest person, no matter how much he hates Donald Trump, should fail to recognize that.
AzWm
. William, in all the years I've been reading your posts..you have never been more wrong..sorry. |
|
|
|
Post by Al-O-Meter on Feb 8, 2021 18:04:39 GMT -8
Uh, A bunch of the insurrectionists said they went in because trump told them to. To the law, that is irrelevant. It doesn't matter if people act, or don't act, or whom they blame for motivating them to act. For Trump to be guilty of incitement it only matters what Trump himself did. For Trump's actions to be incitement he had to direct an immediate and serious risk of harm to a specific identifiable person. If Trump has told the crowd that he wanted them to break into the Capitol Building and hang Mike Pence, then that would be incitement. Vague rhetoric isn't incitement. "Fight like hell" isn't incitement. "Trial by combat" isn't incitement. The words coming from Trump's face had to mention a specific identifiable person per the legal requirements of incitement. Trump didn't do that and it is not incitement, so we have a show trial in the Senate. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Feb 8, 2021 18:13:22 GMT -8
I do not for a second dismiss the importance of the events of Jan 6th. Many of those who took part are being arrested and will be indicted, as they should be. One hopes that all who broke the law will similarly be arrested.
But, on the other hand, I refuse to blow Jan. 6th out of proportion.
* Even if there had been a highly organized effort to take over the U.S. government, it would have failed utterly. (Look at the comical photos of some of those doofuses who invaded the Capitol and then explain how they resemble a highly trained American version of the Waffen SS!)
* Even if a number of elected officials had been killed, there would have been no take-over by Trump supporters or anyone else.
* Even if third plane had hit the Capitol on 9/11, U.S. government would not have fallen. That would have been a blow to our Republic much greater than anything since 1861. Even so, the Republic would would have survived.
We all know what some politicians think of a crisis. It shouldn't be allowed to go to waste. Talk about cynicism!!!!
It's clear to me, at least, that the Left in general is intent on using this riot by a relatively small number of thick-headed protesters as a means of seriously damaging their political opponents.
And that brings us to the current impeachment. Another attempt to not let a crisis go to waste. Except I do not see the crisis. The Democrats control everything except the Supreme Court, even though in the House and Senate that control is tenuous to say the least. And Donald Trump is in Florida. Waiting to laugh at the Dems when he is, once again, acquitted.
But, but, but . . . they almost overthrew the government!!!!! No, they did not, as everyone with an IQ above that of an eel knows. Even if they had come close to achieving that, the event would not justify the attempt by the Left to use the power of the federal government to crush citizens with whom they disagree. Apparently, it is now a federal crime to claim that the election was stolen by the Democrats. This is police state stuff, and no honest person, no matter how much he hates Donald Trump, should fail to recognize that.
AzWm
. This is just...gross. No clue what you're thinking. I can't even process some of the concepts you're trying to equate as "no big deal." It's more minimalism and it's just....mindbending. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Feb 8, 2021 18:28:55 GMT -8
The flip-flopping, lies and mental gymnastics cease when you have to answer the simple question of "Did the president incite insurrection?" Of course he didn't. Incitement is a crime with a clear legal standard. If Trump's detractors thought Trump was actually guilty of incitement they'd be indicting him in a criminal court, but they are all lawyers and know Trump's actions don't meet the necessary requirements of incitement. The whole reason they've chosen to put on this show impeachment of a citizen is because they all know Trump, as a matter of law, did not incite an insurrection. The impeachment trial is the proof you are wrong. More mental gymnastics by you. Playing both sides now? You cannot indict a sitting president, that's standing DOJ policy. The action occurred while he was still in office, ergo impeachment is the only means at their disposal. Just like your BS about it being unconstitutional, this is more word salad that leads to nothing. There's precedent, he openly did it on television, it was planned weeks in advance with campaign-financed money and we know all of this already as it's already been disclosed. If this weren't party over country, he'd be convicted with ease. |
|
|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Feb 8, 2021 18:58:02 GMT -8
I do not for a second dismiss the importance of the events of Jan 6th. Many of those who took part are being arrested and will be indicted, as they should be. One hopes that all who broke the law will similarly be arrested.
But, on the other hand, I refuse to blow Jan. 6th out of proportion.
* Even if there had been a highly organized effort to take over the U.S. government, it would have failed utterly. (Look at the comical photos of some of those doofuses who invaded the Capitol and then explain how they resemble a highly trained American version of the Waffen SS!)
* Even if a number of elected officials had been killed, there would have been no take-over by Trump supporters or anyone else.
* Even if third plane had hit the Capitol on 9/11, U.S. government would not have fallen. That would have been a blow to our Republic much greater than anything since 1861. Even so, the Republic would would have survived.
We all know what some politicians think of a crisis. It shouldn't be allowed to go to waste. Talk about cynicism!!!!
It's clear to me, at least, that the Left in general is intent on using this riot by a relatively small number of thick-headed protesters as a means of seriously damaging their political opponents.
And that brings us to the current impeachment. Another attempt to not let a crisis go to waste. Except I do not see the crisis. The Democrats control everything except the Supreme Court, even though in the House and Senate that control is tenuous to say the least. And Donald Trump is in Florida. Waiting to laugh at the Dems when he is, once again, acquitted.
But, but, but . . . they almost overthrew the government!!!!! No, they did not, as everyone with an IQ above that of an eel knows. Even if they had come close to achieving that, the event would not justify the attempt by the Left to use the power of the federal government to crush citizens with whom they disagree. Apparently, it is now a federal crime to claim that the election was stolen by the Democrats. This is police state stuff, and no honest person, no matter how much he hates Donald Trump, should fail to recognize that.
AzWm
. This is just...gross. No clue what you're thinking. I can't even process some of the concepts you're trying to equate as "no big deal." It's more minimalism and it's just....mindbending.
Instead of a government, let me use the example of a city in my explanation. Let's call the city East Overshoe. Okay, East Overshoe has its ups and downs, but is functioning pretty well in general. Then one day there is a railroad accident. The train runs off the rails and into an ammunition factory.
The factory explodes with the force of thousands of tons of TNT. The factory is destroyed. Dozens of workers are killed in the explosion. The whole district in which the factory was located is almost totally destroyed by fire. Dozens of houses and many businesses are gone. Dozens of citizens near the factory are also killed, scores wounded. It will take hundreds of millions of dollars to make good the losses. Maybe years of hard work will be needed.
But, and here's the point, despite the damage, which was horrendous, East Overshoe survives. As awful the tragedy was, the city was not destroyed. Still, nobody thinks or says that it was no big deal.
Okay, that is an example of a really bad occurrence, a really, really bad one that, even so, was not an existential threat to the location in which the disaster occurred.
Now, let's say that some time later, astronomers announce that a really big asteroid, hitherto undetected, is headed for Earth. Let's say it is two miles in diameter, easily big enough to wipe out a city. And, wouldn't you know, it's going to hit East Overshoe is a couple of days! Maybe time enough to evacuate, but probably not. And there is nothing that can he done to prevent the disaster.
The explosion is certainly a big deal, but one that will not wipe out East Overshoe.
The asteroid? That one is in a totally different category.
Actually, I think the East Overshoe disaster I have hypothesized would be a bigger deal than what happened on Jan. 6th. That does not mean that people, some armed, storming the Capitol building is no a big deal. It was serious for a variety of reasons, and should be responded to appropriately. But it should not be used as an excuse to attack political opponents and limit individual freedom. That would be worse.
AzWm
. |
|
|
|
Post by Al-O-Meter on Feb 8, 2021 19:02:58 GMT -8
You cannot indict a sitting president, that's standing DOJ policy. The action occurred while he was still in office, ergo impeachment is the only means at their disposal. Trump is not a sitting President. He can now be indicted for things he did while he was in office, ergo you don't know what you are talking about. |
|
|
|
Post by uwphoto on Feb 8, 2021 19:15:49 GMT -8
You cannot indict a sitting president, that's standing DOJ policy. The action occurred while he was still in office, ergo impeachment is the only means at their disposal. Trump is not a sitting President. He can now be indicted for things he did while he was in office, ergo you don't know what you are talking about. Turns out the lawyer for the QAnon Shaman is going to use the Jim Jones "cult" defense. Whats your excuse? |
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Feb 8, 2021 19:18:13 GMT -8
This is just...gross. No clue what you're thinking. I can't even process some of the concepts you're trying to equate as "no big deal." It's more minimalism and it's just....mindbending.
Instead of a government, let me use the example of a city in my explanation. Let's call the city East Overshoe. Okay, East Overshoe has its ups and downs, but is functioning pretty well in general. Then one day there is a railroad accident. The train runs off the rails and into an ammunition factory.
The factory explodes with the force of thousands of tons of TNT. The factory is destroyed. Dozens of workers are killed in the explosion. The whole district in which the factory was located is almost totally destroyed by fire. Dozens of houses and many businesses are gone. Dozens of citizens near the factory are also killed, scores wounded. It will take hundreds of millions of dollars to make good the losses. Maybe years of hard work will be needed.
But, and here's the point, despite the damage, which was horrendous, East Overshoe survives. As awful the tragedy was, the city was not destroyed. Still, nobody thinks or says that it was no big deal.
Okay, that is an example of a really bad occurrence, a really, really bad one that, even so, was not an existential threat to the location in which the disaster occurred.
Now, let's say that some time later, astronomers announce that a really big asteroid, hitherto undetected, is headed for Earth. Let's say it is two miles in diameter, easily big enough to wipe out a city. And, wouldn't you know, it's going to hit East Overshoe is a couple of days! Maybe time enough to evacuate, but probably not. And there is nothing that can he done to prevent the disaster.
The explosion is certainly a big deal, but one that will not wipe out East Overshoe.
The asteroid? That one is in a totally different category.
Actually, I think the East Overshoe disaster I have hypothesized would be a bigger deal than what happened on Jan. 6th. That does not mean that people, some armed, storming the Capitol building is no a big deal. It was serious for a variety of reasons, and should be responded to appropriately. But it should not be used as an excuse to attack political opponents and limit individual freedom. That would be worse.
AzWm
.Forgive me but your initial post was literally downplaying the entire event, even with a 9/11 reference thrown in. Downplaying what happened in any form or fashion is gross, if we are being honest. Whether or not they would have succeeeded is not the point of the exercise. I cannot underscore that enough. Let's throw the whataboutism aside, strip away the unrelated banter and deal with facts. - A sitting president orchestrated a rally, fueled by false claims of voter fraud for months. - There is actual documentation that illustrates this was planned using Trump campaign connected funds. - People died, including a Capitol police officer. Other officers that were involved have committed suicide in the weeks since the insurrection occurred. - The president was captured on video watching the events unfold with his son, smiling. - The president refused to call in the National Guard. The vice president, who many of the rioters wanted to hang from actual gallows, had to intervene and get the National Guard involved. - The Capitol was understaffed, deliberately, even though this event was planned for weeks. Security was extremely light given the gravity of the situation. - Multiple members of the Senate amplified the false allegations of voter fraud, including Hawley and Ted Cruz. - The president's words and actions on January 6th (and the days and weeks leading up to it) created a firestorm of right-wing extremism. Parler data mining and captured texts and messages convey images and concepts of murdering public officials, potentially taking hostages and interrupting the continuity of government. Please do not downplay what happened. Do not misdirect. What occurred can never happen again and there MUST be consequences. |
|
|
|
Post by aardvark on Feb 9, 2021 16:31:40 GMT -8
This is a question I can't find a definitive answer to. When Trump is not convicted in the Senate (it just isn't going to happen), what happens next? Will the fact that a majority of senators, but not a 2/3 majority, vote to convict the former President, will that alone be enough to prevent Trump from running for office again?
|
|
|
|
Post by Al-O-Meter on Feb 9, 2021 17:10:06 GMT -8
This is a question I can't find a definitive answer to. When Trump is not convicted in the Senate (it just isn't going to happen), what happens next? Will the fact that a majority of senators, but not a 2/3 majority, vote to convict the former President, will that alone be enough to prevent Trump from running for office again? No. If Trump isn't convicted then it is over. The Senate only goes on to a vote to bar from office if Trump is convicted. |
|
