What Should Be Done With Trump?

[DKW 86 7,410]

25 minutes ago, Brad_ATX said:

Oh I do and it's hilarious.  You don't understand the basics of the impeachment process.  It's funny that you're calling others stupid while asserting a completely false premise.

You'll be too stubborn to admit as such, but that's just you being you.

And my being more correct on what happened over the last four years is still intact. 

How many hours have we read about Trump's last Impeachment? How many grown people on this board wasted hours posting up the latest hairbrained scheme or opinion piece by the latest nutjob on what was going to happen only to see that just about zero ever did. The last Impeachment was ultimately a complete waste of time. It went nowhere and it was never at any time going to go anywhere. A genuine large scale exercise in Intellectual Masturbation. Schiff was shown in the Impeachment notes that he knew it was a total sham from the start. The WSJ basically said no one should ever believe another word he ever said again.

All the Adam Schiff Transcripts

Newly released documents show he knew all along that there was no proof of Russia-Trump collusion.

By 

The Editorial Board

May 12, 2020 7:29 pm ET

Americans expect that politicians will lie, but sometimes the examples are so brazen that they deserve special notice. Newly released Congressional testimony shows that Adam Schiff spread falsehoods shamelessly about Russia and Donald Trump for three years even as his own committee gathered contrary evidence.

The House Intelligence Committee last week released 57 transcripts of interviews it conducted in its investigation into Russia’s meddling in the 2016 election. The committee probe started in January 2017 under then-Chair Devin Nunes and concluded in March 2018 with a report finding no evidence that the Trump campaign conspired with the Kremlin. Most of the transcripts were ready for release long ago, but Mr. Schiff oddly refused to release them after he became chairman in 2019. He only released them last week when the White House threatened to do it first.

Now we know why. From the earliest days of the collusion narrative, Mr. Schiff insisted that he had evidence proving the plot. In March 2017 on MSNBC, Mr. Schiff teased that he couldn’t “go into particulars, but there is more than circumstantial evidence now.”

In December 2017 he told CNN that collusion was a fact: “The Russians offered help, the campaign accepted help. The Russians gave help and the President made full use of that help.” In April 2018, Mr. Schiff released his response to Mr. Nunes’s report, stating that its finding of no collusion “was unsupported by the facts and the investigative record.”

None of this was true, and Mr. Schiff knew it. In July 2017, here’s what former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper told Mr. Schiff and his colleagues: “I never saw any direct empirical evidence that the Trump campaign or someone in it was plotting/conspiring with the Russians to meddle with the election.” Three months later, former Obama Attorney General Loretta Lynch agreed that while she’d seen “concerning” information, “I don’t recall anything being briefed up to me.” Former Deputy AG Sally Yates concurred several weeks later: “We were at the fact-gathering stage here, not the conclusion stage.”

MORE...

[McLoofus 35,182]

53 minutes ago, Brad_ATX said:

But he's not going to resign and not doing something sets an awful, awful precedent.

It's insane reading people say that he should just get away with this. That a sitting POTUS should incite insurrection, open the doors of the capitol and let terrorists in, and just get away with it.

Somebody even said it would be petty and spiteful. 

5 people died. We should just let it go.

If anything makes it obvious that these MAGA psychos aren't going away, it's not the events of the week as much as the pursuant conversation. These people *still* don't get it. They're clearly not going to. Ever.

[Brad_ATX 13,654]

46 minutes ago, DKW 86 said:

And my being more correct on what happened over the last four years is still intact. 

How many hours have we read about Trump's last Impeachment? How many grown people on this board wasted hours posting up the latest hairbrained scheme or opinion piece by the latest nutjob on what was going to happen only to see that just about zero ever did. The last Impeachment was ultimately a complete waste of time. It went nowhere and it was never at any time going to go anywhere. A genuine large scale exercise in Intellectual Masturbation. Schiff was shown in the Impeachment notes that he knew it was a total sham from the start. The WSJ basically said no one should ever believe another word he ever said again.

All the Adam Schiff Transcripts

Newly released documents show he knew all along that there was no proof of Russia-Trump collusion.

By 

The Editorial Board

May 12, 2020 7:29 pm ET

Americans expect that politicians will lie, but sometimes the examples are so brazen that they deserve special notice. Newly released Congressional testimony shows that Adam Schiff spread falsehoods shamelessly about Russia and Donald Trump for three years even as his own committee gathered contrary evidence.

The House Intelligence Committee last week released 57 transcripts of interviews it conducted in its investigation into Russia’s meddling in the 2016 election. The committee probe started in January 2017 under then-Chair Devin Nunes and concluded in March 2018 with a report finding no evidence that the Trump campaign conspired with the Kremlin. Most of the transcripts were ready for release long ago, but Mr. Schiff oddly refused to release them after he became chairman in 2019. He only released them last week when the White House threatened to do it first.

Now we know why. From the earliest days of the collusion narrative, Mr. Schiff insisted that he had evidence proving the plot. In March 2017 on MSNBC, Mr. Schiff teased that he couldn’t “go into particulars, but there is more than circumstantial evidence now.”

In December 2017 he told CNN that collusion was a fact: “The Russians offered help, the campaign accepted help. The Russians gave help and the President made full use of that help.” In April 2018, Mr. Schiff released his response to Mr. Nunes’s report, stating that its finding of no collusion “was unsupported by the facts and the investigative record.”

None of this was true, and Mr. Schiff knew it. In July 2017, here’s what former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper told Mr. Schiff and his colleagues: “I never saw any direct empirical evidence that the Trump campaign or someone in it was plotting/conspiring with the Russians to meddle with the election.” Three months later, former Obama Attorney General Loretta Lynch agreed that while she’d seen “concerning” information, “I don’t recall anything being briefed up to me.” Former Deputy AG Sally Yates concurred several weeks later: “We were at the fact-gathering stage here, not the conclusion stage.”

MORE...

Whatever makes you feel better about calling others stupid and then immediately making a fundamentally false assertion yourself.

[SaltyTiger 7,762]

3 hours ago, Brad_ATX said:

This is the correct take.  Resignation would be best for the country.  Hell man, he could do it under the guise of "Being tired of the persecution" for all I care in order to save face.

But he's not going to resign and not doing something sets an awful, awful precedent.

He enjoys persecution and the fight. Resignation at this point would best for the country and in a sense an honorable thing from him. I thought maybe he would bow out of his re-election after his bout with covid under the guise of being worn out........seemed to energize him.  

[AUDub 11,131]

3 hours ago, Brad_ATX said:

Whatever makes you feel better about calling others stupid and then immediately making a fundamentally false assertion yourself.

He confuses quantity with quality in his walls o' text. 

[homersapien 11,352]

Don't expect much help from the spineless Rethuglicans.

 

Republicans largely silent about consequences of deadly attack and Trump’s role in inciting it

Anne Gearan, 

Josh Dawsey and 

Mike DeBonis

 

Three days after a mob attack on the U.S. Capitol carried out in President Trump’s name, Republican leaders have yet to outline plans to hold anyone accountable or to alter a platform and priorities lashed to the outgoing Republican president.

Trump and some congressional Republicans, meanwhile, stepped up their efforts Saturday to head off Democratic efforts to impeach Trump over what they call his incitement of violence.

Behind closed doors, Trump and his son-in-law and adviser Jared Kushner have encouraged allies to fight against a potential impeachment by issuing statements on social media or elsewhere that discourage or condemn the move, people familiar with the calls said.

It was not clear whether those efforts were having much success. Republican allies of the president were mainly muted Saturday, as pressure continued to mount among Democrats to try to force Trump from office before his term expires Jan. 20.

Two National Guards are seen through the fence Saturday where roses are left and which now now surrounds the U.S. Capitol building three days after it was stormed, invaded and vandalized by Trump rioters. (Astrid Riecken/For The Washington Post)

Meanwhile, a small group of Republicans who had voted to certify President-elect Joe Biden’s victory released a letter Saturday calling on Biden to try to head off impeachment.

“In the spirit of healing and fidelity to our Constitution, I am asking that @JoeBiden formally request that Speaker Pelosi discontinue her efforts to impeach President Trump a second time,” tweeted Rep. Ken Buck (R-Colo.), sharing a copy of the letter signed by seven lawmakers.

A Biden spokesman on Saturday referred to the president-elect’s comments the day before, when he said he would leave impeachment decisions to Congress.

Senate Republicans have not moved to investigate the assault on their workplace, which forced Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell to flee with the help of his security team while Vice President Pence was whisked to a secure location.

Democrats are pushing to rapidly impeach the president a second time in less than two years — hoping to force Trump from office even a few days early.

Removing Trump by impeachment or by invoking the 25th Amendment governing unfitness for office remains a high hurdle, however, with less than two weeks remaining in his presidency. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) has not made a formal determination to move forward with a second impeachment.

McConnell (R-Ky.) is circulating a memo to Republican senators that outlines how a potential Senate trial would work in proceedings that would all but certainly occur after Trump leaves the White House.

Relatively few Republicans have publicly disavowed Trump, who was received enthusiastically during a phone-in appearance at a members-only gathering during the Republican National Committee meeting the morning after the mob attack.

Former U.N. ambassador Nikki Haley, for example, criticized the president’s actions since the election during a speech at the RNC. But she also embraced much of his presidency and praised his work in office, including his record on judicial appointments and the economy.

“And it’s a real shame, because I am one who believes our country made some truly extraordinary gains in the last four years,” she said. “President Trump and Republicans deserve great credit for that. We should not shy away from our accomplishments.”

She tweeted Saturday that the “shameful display of the riots” was a gift to America’s enemies and should never be allowed to recur, with no mention of the president’s role in inciting the attack. She separately tweeted opposition to the actions of Twitter and other social media companies, who have banned Trump from their platforms for allegedly fomenting the threat of violence.

A seven-point strategy memo from the Republican Study Committee released Friday made no mention of the attack and recommitted to themes Trump has championed, including the investigation of alleged voter fraud.

“As we move forward, we have an opportunity now more than ever to show the freedom-loving American people we represent that we are here fighting for them!” Rep. Jim Banks (R-Ind.) wrote.

“People are right to be frustrated with the way that states conducted the 2020 election. The rules were changed in the 11th hour in a way that sowed mistrust in our democratic process and many feel as if their votes weren’t counted. That can’t happen again,” Banks wrote.

Sen. Patrick J. Toomey (R-Pa.) said Saturday that he believes Trump has “committed impeachable offenses,” adding during an interview on Fox News that he is not sure what, if anything, his colleagues will do in coming days.

“I don’t know what’s going to land on the Senate floor, if anything,” he said, referring to articles of impeachment expected to be voted on in the House next week. He did not directly call for Trump’s removal and tempered his view about Trump’s role.

“I don’t know what they are going to send over, and one of the things that I’m concerned about, frankly, is whether the House would completely politicize something,” Toomey said.

Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) remains the lone Senate Republican to call for Trump’s resignation over what she told the Anchorage Daily News on Friday were his failures before and after the Capitol assault. The attack during certification of Biden’s victory left five people dead, including a Capitol Police officer.

Sen. Ben Sasse (R-Neb.) has said he would consider impeachment.

While key lawmakers, Democrat and Republican, have called for a bipartisan and bicameral review of Wednesday’s events, there has been no decision yet on what form the investigation will take. Several congressional committees have announced they intend to investigate, and a special joint panel could be created to handle the probe.

So far the response from lawmakers regarding the security implications of Wednesday’s breach has been mostly free of political finger-pointing. But Republicans appear prepared to resist any attempt to expand a congressional probe beyond the scope of a security review and do not favor including the actions of Trump and other leaders who may have had a role in inciting the riot.

In a signal of how the investigation could become partisan, a freshman House Republican, Rep. Victoria Spartz of Indiana, sent a letter to Pelosi on Friday, noting that the top House security official, the sergeant at arms, “works under the direction of the Speaker.”

“Please advise what processes were directed by you to provide enhanced security . . . in light of the known and anticipated major public demonstration on January 6th,” she wrote. Spartz made no mention of the Senate sergeant of arms, who works under the Republican majority leader.

House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) on Friday called the assault “un-American,” and said he had told Trump on Wednesday that “he had a great responsibility to intervene to quell the mob and start the healing process for our country.”

McCarthy said nothing about Trump’s culpability in falsely claiming victory and urging supporters to help him overturn the election, or in encouraging thousands to march on the Capitol. He was among the majority of House Republicans who voted to overturn the election after the siege.

“Over the coming weeks we will work with law enforcement to bring anyone responsible for the violence to justice. Lawlessness and extremism have no place in our way of life,” McCarthy said in Friday’s statement, urging that “partisans of all stripes” come together around a peaceful transfer of power.

“Impeaching the President with just 12 days left in his term will only divide our country more,” McCarthy said.

In McConnell’s impeachment memo, obtained by The Washington Post, the majority leader’s office noted that the Senate will not reconvene for substantive business until Jan. 19, which means the earliest possible date that an impeachment trial could begin would be the day before Biden is inaugurated.

Although the Senate will hold two pro forma sessions next week, on Jan. 12 and Jan. 15, it is barred from conducting any kind of business during those days — including “beginning to act on received articles of impeachment from the House” — without agreement from all 100 senators. With a cadre of Trump-allied senators in the Republican conference, that unanimous consent is highly unlikely.

Trump has not spoken to Pence since before the assault, when he urged Pence to try to block congressional certification of Biden’s victory, according to two people familiar with the relationship, who like others interviewed spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the president’s actions on the record. Trump remains angry at Pence for refusing to do as Trump wished.

Pence plans to attend Biden’s inauguration on Jan. 20, a person familiar with his plans said Saturday. Trump has said he will not attend, breaking a long-standing tradition.

Trump remained out of sight Saturday, and unnaturally silent. Twitter had permanently revoked his account on Friday evening, removing his accustomed direct broadcast system to nearly 90 million followers.

Trump spent much of the day Saturday railing about Twitter taking his account, according to two officials. The president has not said anything about the five people who died in the attack, including a Capitol Police officer, nor has he moved to lower the flags of the U.S. government in their honor. He does not plan to make that order and has complained to advisers that he is being treated unfairly, two people familiar with his comments said.

Some White House officials are concerned about the president’s liability from a broader investigation into the event. Trump knew for days there would be a march and wanted to participate himself, only to be thwarted for his own security, officials said.

A number of lawyers who participated in Trump’s last impeachment defense, including Jay Sekulow, Pat Philbin and Pat Cipollone, would be unlikely to participate this time in defending the president, one adviser said. Possibilities include Trump’s personal lawyer, Rudolph W. Giuliani, or defense attorney Alan Dershowitz, the adviser said.

Party officials remain torn over what to do about Trump in the final days — with many ready to cut ties but wary because the party’s grass-roots activists and supporters are still largely with him.

“If you can replicate his draw amongst rural, working-class voters without the insanity, you have a permanent governing majority,” said Josh Holmes, a top adviser to McConnell.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/republicans-trump-impeachment-attack/2021/01/09/62e4aea0-5289-11eb-bda4-615aaefd0555_story.html

 

[homersapien 11,352]

For Trump, the end is coming swiftly and with stinging rebukes

Dan Balz

Jan. 9, 2021

The last chapter in the presidency of Donald Trump has come down to this: Under what circumstances will he leave office and how much will that departure further sully an already besmirched legacy.

The end is coming in ways Trump could not have imagined before Wednesday’s riot at the Capitol by his supporters. He is hearing calls for his resignation from conservative voices, among them Rupert Murdoch’s Wall Street Journal editorial page.

Members of his Cabinet and White House staff are deserting him, though perhaps too late to escape the fallout from having stood by him for so long. Twitter has banned him permanently due to the risk of further incitement of violence, denying him the favored platform for his incendiary messaging and attacks on rivals.

More ominously, he faces the prospect of being impeached for a second time by House Democrats, led by Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.). Were that to happen, Trump would stand alone among the nation’s presidents for such ignobility.

Absent a resignation or a move by Vice President Pence to lead the invoking of the 25th Amendment, for which Pence shows no stomach, impeachment proceedings could be on a fast-track. In just a few days, the idea of impeachment has gone from preliminary conversations to the prospect of possible floor action early next week, if Trump has not resigned.

Trump’s role in whipping up the mob that invaded and then desecrated the U.S. Capitol, the most visible symbol of American democracy, has left the president with few defenders. There are the last bitter-enders of the nativist army that has provided aid and comfort to him for five years. There are the members of the Republican National Committee, who met and cheered the president in Florida on Friday.

There are still some allies in Congress, though fewer than ever. Even before the Capitol was overrun, Trump had been abandoned by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), who voted against objections to the electoral count and made his opposition clear in a stinging floor statement.

The president’s relationship with Pence has been ruptured because the vice president did the constitutionally limited — and correct — thing in presiding without interference over the counting of the electoral college votes that made official President-elect Joe Biden’s victory. Trump apparently cannot understand why the vice president would stand with the Constitution. The absence of a commitment to the Constitution has been a persistent defect of Trump’s presidency.

The Washington Post and others have drawn vivid portraits all week of a bunkered and embittered president, surrounded by only a few advisers. Under pressure, he sent out a video Thursday evening asking that “tempers be cooled” and acknowledging that there would be a new administration on Jan. 20. He said that his focus now would be on assuring a “smooth, orderly and seamless” transition. He did not mention Biden or offer congratulations.

On Friday, before the permanent suspension from Twitter, he tweeted that the nearly 75 million people who voted for him will have “a giant voice” in the future and are not to be “disrespected” or treated unfairly. Later he tweeted that he would not attend Biden’s inauguration, the first president in more than a century to skip a ceremony that would have signaled his admission that the election was fairly decided.

Two issues lie behind the moves to force Trump from office. One is the issue of clear and present danger, or more simply, what further damage could be done by a temperamentally fragile president in the final days.

Pelosi took the extraordinary step of publicly revealing that she had talked with Gen. Mark A. Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, to discuss “available precautions for preventing an unstable president from initiating military hostilities or accessing the launch codes and ordering a nuclear strike.”

Pelosi’s expressed fears were alarmingly direct in language, but this was not the first time the issue of what Trump might do with his commander in chief powers in the final days had been raised by those who have served in government. Earlier, the 10 living former defense secretaries had warned Pentagon leaders not to involve the military in any election disputes and pointed to severe consequences for those leaders if they allowed that to happen.

To some people, the easiest way out to alleviate worries about what Trump might do in his remaining days would be a quick presidential resignation and the elevation of Pence to the presidency until Biden is sworn in. Those who favor resignation see impeachment as prolonged and divisive and view the use of the 25th Amendment, in which Pence and a majority of the Cabinet would declare Trump unable to discharge his duties, as a far messier conclusion to his presidency.

The other issue driving talk of impeachment is accountability for stoking the violence against the Capitol. The draft impeachment language prepared by House Democrats makes that role the basis for the charge against the president.

Impeachment and conviction, were the Senate to take such action, would do something else: It would deny Trump the opportunity to ever serve as president for a second time. Trump closed his Thursday night video by telling his supporters that “our incredible journey is only just beginning.” He has been dangling the possibility of another campaign for president in 2024, perhaps to be launched as he left office.

Until Wednesday’s attack on the Capitol, he was seen as capable of continuing his role as the most prominent and powerful leader of the Republican Party and of freezing the field of 2024 GOP presidential aspirants for a possible run of his own or to play kingmaker.

His diminished status could lessen the likelihood that the party would turn to him again as its presidential nominee, though he has been counted out before and continues to enjoy support at the grass-roots level and among some party officials. Impeachment would take that question off the table permanently.

Biden was asked about impeachment on Friday and tried to deflect. He said any such decision should be left to lawmakers in Congress and that he would continue to focus on preparations to become president. It was neither a rejection nor an endorsement, and he reiterated that he has long seen Trump as unfit for office. He said he believed the fastest way to have Trump removed is to let the Constitution work and await the end of Trump’s term at noon Jan. 20.

A possible impeachment trial could tie up the Senate just as Biden is beginning his presidency. That would delay such Biden priorities as confirmation of Cabinet members and action on a trillion-dollar coronavirus relief package that he said would be his first legislative priority. These are hardly the ideal circumstances for the incoming president but not surprising given the history of Trump in office.

House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) said Friday that impeachment would only further divide a divided nation at a time when, he argued, healing is needed. Democrats see those as hollow words, coming from someone who helped give support to the president’s falsehoods about a stolen election and who voted in favor of objections to the counts in Arizona and Pennsylvania even after Trump’s supporters ransacked the Capitol. McCarthy is not the only Republican now trying shamelessly to scramble to higher ground

There will be consequences of acting to remove the president and consequences of not acting. Time is short and the president’s responsibility for what took place on Wednesday undeniable. However and whenever he leaves the White House, he will be forever marked by his final days in office.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/rebukes-trump-presidency-ending-/2021/01/09/35f2de3c-5287-11eb-83e3-322644d82356_story.html

[DKW 86 7,410]

15 hours ago, Brad_ATX said:

Whatever makes you feel better about calling others stupid and then immediately making a fundamentally false assertion yourself.

"genuine large scale exercise in Intellectual Masturbation."
I stand by that and Rest my case.

We wasted 3.5 years of this nation's time doing something that amounted to just slightly more than nothing.
Do I ever expect the people involved to admit that? OH.HELL.NO! They will never admit the obvious that what they did amounted to little more than nothing. We saw media people and political opportunists in this Nation hyperventilate for 3.5 years over essentially nothing and what is actually being called by the grownups with access to the real notes and real facts as the work of liars. 

I have correctly said the same thing for four years now. 
All these people screaming like a howler monkey guaranteeing Trump's removal/impeachment for YEARS have been proved by the facts to be wrong over and over. Trump was never going to be removed with McConnell leading the Senate. Was he a bad President? YES, TOTALLY AGREE. but Impeachment and a Trial are tough walls to scale and should be. Otherwise we would be Impeaching every President that we disagree with going forward. Hell, there is a good chance we are going to do that anyway.

To be perfectly fair, this was just Clinton Impeachment 2.0. Back in the 90s the Republicans wasted years trying to Impeach Clinton knowing 100% it was a waste of time. Today we wasted 4 years trying to remove Trump, knowing that there was no chance he would be removed either. Other than appealing to your donors, and infuriating the voters, what is the point? *Both HOR Leaderships Lost Seats after the Impeachments. 

 

[DKW 86 7,410]

11 hours ago, AUDub said:

He confuses quantity with quality in his walls o' text. 

Its better than being proved wrong on just about everything posted on this board for 4 years. 

[bigbird 60,368]

18 hours ago, Brad_ATX said:

This is the correct take.  Resignation would be best for the country.  Hell man, he could do it under the guise of "Being tired of the persecution" for all I care in order to save face.

But he's not going to resign and not doing something sets an awful, awful precedent.

Watch him do it on the last day and have Pence give him a presidential pardon.  That would be pretty petty and spiteful too.

[AUBwins 10,064]

1 hour ago, bigbird said:

Watch him do it on the last day and have Pence give him a presidential pardon.  That would be pretty petty and spiteful too.

Would Pence do it though? That would be a perfect FU to Trump for the way he basically left Pence to die, despite Pence being one of the most loyal VPs I've seen.  Oftentimes doing the dirty work for Trump, like walking out with the football kneeling for example. 

[bigbird 60,368]

27 minutes ago, AUBwins said:

Would Pence do it though? That would be a perfect FU to Trump for the way he basically left Pence to die, despite Pence being one of the most loyal VPs I've seen.  Oftentimes doing the dirty work for Trump, like walking out with the football kneeling for example. 

If it were me, I wouldn't.  Pence may but probably would balk when the pressure was applied.

[DKW 86 7,410]

On 1/9/2021 at 9:56 AM, AUDub said:

He's getting hung up on due process and procedure, hung up on things like "discovery, depositions, etc."

Impeachment is a political process that resembles a criminal trial and the Senate could change the rules on a whim if they so chose with a simple majority. He can bitch about whether the process is fair, but he's viewing this through the lens of a criminal trial in error. 

If you are happy that "the Senate could change the rules on a whim" then why dont we just remove anyone at anytime for anything? WOOHOO!
To be frank, if you actually think this is anyway a good idea...you need help. If a perpetually squishy standard excites you, wait. Karma is probably about to "Bite you in the Ass" because you are probably about to have that squishy standard change and slap you across the face.

 

[aubiefifty 16,697]

i doubt pence is going to pardon trump. pence and trump are pretty much at odds with each other and talking heads say pence is really upset with trump. no iexpect trump to try and pardon himself. and if that is a legal option i would love to see him impeached before that happens. i have never seen anything definitive on it. i also think it is a bad look. as it would be for trump to pardon his family.

[Brad_ATX 13,654]

6 hours ago, bigbird said:

Watch him do it on the last day and have Pence give him a presidential pardon.  That would be pretty petty and spiteful too.

I don't think Pence would pardon him at this point.  I really, really don't.

[Brad_ATX 13,654]

9 hours ago, DKW 86 said:

"genuine large scale exercise in Intellectual Masturbation."
I stand by that and Rest my case.

We wasted 3.5 years of this nation's time doing something that amounted to just slightly more than nothing.
Do I ever expect the people involved to admit that? OH.HELL.NO! They will never admit the obvious that what they did amounted to little more than nothing. We saw media people and political opportunists in this Nation hyperventilate for 3.5 years over essentially nothing and what is actually being called by the grownups with access to the real notes and real facts as the work of liars. 

I have correctly said the same thing for four years now. 
All these people screaming like a howler monkey guaranteeing Trump's removal/impeachment for YEARS have been proved by the facts to be wrong over and over. Trump was never going to be removed with McConnell leading the Senate. Was he a bad President? YES, TOTALLY AGREE. but Impeachment and a Trial are tough walls to scale and should be. Otherwise we would be Impeaching every President that we disagree with going forward. Hell, there is a good chance we are going to do that anyway.

To be perfectly fair, this was just Clinton Impeachment 2.0. Back in the 90s the Republicans wasted years trying to Impeach Clinton knowing 100% it was a waste of time. Today we wasted 4 years trying to remove Trump, knowing that there was no chance he would be removed either. Other than appealing to your donors, and infuriating the voters, what is the point? *Both HOR Leaderships Lost Seats after the Impeachments. 

 

LOL!  Still can't see your blind spot.  You are an amazing creature sometimes dude.

[Leftfield 2,583]

1 minute ago, Brad_ATX said:

I don't think Pence would pardon him at this point.  I really, really don't.

Moot point because there is absolutely no way Trump will ever resign. I guarantee the entire notion of it is laughable to him.

[Brad_ATX 13,654]

1 minute ago, Leftfield said:

Moot point because there is absolutely no way Trump will ever resign. I guarantee the entire notion of it is laughable to him.

Oh I agree with you there.

[DKW 86 7,410]

12 minutes ago, Brad_ATX said:

LOL!  Still can't see your blind spot.  You are an amazing creature sometimes dude.

If anyone should have been removed it should have been Trump. The Sierra Foxtrots in DC just could not make it happen. Even with 4 years, the FBI, a bought and paid for dossier, 4 years, Adam Schiff on every channel. Maybe Michael Avenatti, you know "the man on a mission from God" can take time off from his convictions for stealing from his clients, tax evasion, mail fraud, business fraud, defrauding his clients, blackmailing Nike, etc, to go back on another several hundred CNN, MSNBC, shows and , Co-Host GMA again, etc and tell us once more how he has it all figured out, while half of America gets ready to French Kiss his ass for supplying them with more Intellectual Masturbation Material. 

Cause the facts dont matter.
The reputation of the idiot making the claims dont matter.
The pure charlatan and huckster factor dont matter.
These Sierra Foxtrots with believe ANYTHING FROM ANYBODY as long as it fits their delusional IMFs.

 

[Brad_ATX 13,654]

Just now, DKW 86 said:

If anyone should have been removed it should have been Trump. The Sierra Foxtrots in DC just could not make it happen. Even with 4 years, the FBI, a bought and paid for dossier, 4 years, Adam Schiff on every channel. Maybe Michael Avenatti, you know "the man on a mission from God" can take time off from his convictions for stealing from his clients, tax evasion, mail fraud, business fraud, defrauding his clients, blackmailing Nike, etc, to go back on another several hundred CNN, MSNBC, shows and , Co-Host GMA again, etc and tell us once more how he has it all figured out, while half of America gets ready to French Kiss his ass for supplying them with more Intellectual Masturbation Material. 

Cause the facts dont matter.
The reputation of the idiot making the claims dont matter.
The pure charlatan and huckster factor dont matter.
These Sierra Foxtrots with believe ANYTHING FROM ANYBODY as long as it fits their delusional IMFs.

 

You're our arguing to the sky about all of this.  I'm just saying you called people on here stupid while immediately following it up with an equally stupid (and verifiably false) point.

Just own that man.  Say you screwed up for once.

[bigbird 60,368]

43 minutes ago, Brad_ATX said:

I don't think Pence would pardon him at this point.  I really, really don't.

Me either

[AUDub 11,131]

2 hours ago, DKW 86 said:

If you are happy that "the Senate could change the rules on a whim" then why dont we just remove anyone at anytime for anything? WOOHOO!

You're raising hell because you're simply wrong, man.

Like I said, you can bitch about what constitutes fairness here until you're blue in the face, but the fact of the matter is, well, it is what it is. 

You're making a fool of yourself. 

2 hours ago, DKW 86 said:

To be frank, if you actually think this is anyway a good idea...you need help. If a perpetually squishy standard excites you, wait. Karma is probably about to "Bite you in the Ass" because you are probably about to have that squishy standard change and slap you across the face.

Again, this is how it's always been. Just because I'm explaining that to you doesn't excuse you being an obstinate little bitch about it. 

[DKW 86 7,410]

31 minutes ago, Brad_ATX said:

You're our arguing to the sky about all of this.  I'm just saying you called people on here stupid while immediately following it up with an equally stupid (and verifiably false) point.

Just own that man.  Say you screwed up for once.

Okay, what point are you talking about?

I was reading about Avenatti just now. You know, if trump changed his name to Avenatti, The DNC would be in love with him again. The comparison with Avenatti, an emotional bully that constantly makes grossly exaggerated claims that he cant back up, irrationally loved by those on his side of the political aisle, business failure blowhard that cheated everyone he knows and every woman he was ever around. Pathological liar extraordinaire... Those that hate Trump loved the same things in Avenatti that they hated in Trump.

I guess it's true. People hate all unbelievable bastards except their own unbelievable bastard.

[DKW 86 7,410]

1 minute ago, AUDub said:

You're raising hell because you're simply wrong, man.

Like I said, you can bitch about what constitutes fairness here until you're blue in the face, but the fact of the matter is, well, it is what it is. 

You're making a fool of yourself. 

Again, this is how it's always been. Just because I'm explaining that to you doesn't excuse you being an obstinate little bitch about it. 

And I am pointing out that you obviously think it is fine to enable never-ending shifting standards in pursuit of destroying someone. 
THAT.IS.CRAZY.

[AUDub 11,131]

1 minute ago, DKW 86 said:

And I am pointing out that you obviously think it is fine to enable never-ending shifting standards in pursuit of destroying someone. 
THAT.IS.CRAZY.

Shifting standards in what regard? You want to treat this as a criminal trial. It may resemble one, but the fact of the matter is that is not what this is. Trump isn't risking deprivation of "life, liberty or pursuit of happiness" here.

It is not a criminal trial, full stop, so **** that framework.

You argue in defense of principle but hardly understand the principles you're defending.