Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

The Impeachment Trial

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
    Axelrod sums it up pretty well, I think, to CNN....



    Former Obama chief strategist David Axelrod said he attended a focus group with Democratic voters in Chicago on Friday, describing the gathering as "chilling" because impeachment "didn't come up" until more than an hour into the session despite it taking place amid the Senate trial of President Trump.

    Axelrod, who serves as a political analyst on CNN, shared about his experience during an interview with network anchor Erin Burnett on "OutFront" on Friday night, as Democratic House impeachment managers made their final arguments in the trial before White House lawyers begin their defense of the president on Saturday.

    "I was in a focus group this morning for the Institute for Politics here at the University of Chicago with some Chicago Democratic voters, and it was chilling to hear them talk about this," Axelrod said. "Because impeachment didn’t come up, no one volunteered it, for 80 minutes into the focus group, and we’re right in the middle of the trial."

    "When it came up, they said, you know, it's terrible what he did, the case has been proven, but we know how it's going to turn out," Axelrod continued. "So we're not really that interested, we're ready to move on."
    He should at least be happy that people in the focus group believe the case against Trump has been proven, because it means Democrats have successfully planted the lie in their consciousness.
    Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
    But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
    Than a fool in the eyes of God


    From "Fools Gold" by Petra

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
      He should at least be happy that people in the focus group believe the case against Trump has been proven, because it means Democrats have successfully planted the lie in their consciousness.
      Well, like the very serious and somber Aunt Nancy cackled, "he will be impeached forever".
      The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

      Comment


      • Trump's A-Team is up today. They say that part of their argument will include the numerous pieces of exculpatory evidence the House managers "forgot" to present.
        Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
        But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
        Than a fool in the eyes of God


        From "Fools Gold" by Petra

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
          Trump's A-Team is up today. They say that part of their argument will include the numerous pieces of exculpatory evidence the House managers "forgot" to present.
          Like a hurricane that happened that caused Trump to cancel the scheduled meeting he had in Poland with the Ukraine President? Don't you think the American people would have wanted to know that Trump kept his promise to put America first?
          Last edited by RumTumTugger; 01-25-2020, 11:14 AM.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
            He should at least be happy that people in the focus group believe the case against Trump has been proven, because it means Democrats have successfully planted the lie in their consciousness.
            Look at how many still believe that Trump colluded with Putin/Russia. Not just here but IIRC something like +70% Democrats were still saying that Mueller had found collusion even after the release of the Mueller Report and his testimony before Congress.

            I'm always still in trouble again

            "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
            "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
            "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

            Comment


            • Senator Joni Ernst talking about today's defense presentation:

              "I thought today was an incredible two hours, and within two hours, I thought that the White House counsel and their team entirely shredded the case that has been presented by the House managers. What we heard today was very concise; it was full of truths and facts, as presented by the House managers’ own witnesses. It was not filled with half-truths and personal stories.

              "What we saw today was factual, relevant to what is going on in the Senate, and it points out that there have been a lot of half-truths promulgated by the House managers and absolutely pushed by the media as well."

              https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2...-in-two-hours/

              And it seems Shifty Schiff's lie that the Trump administration threatened Republicans saying that their heads would be on pikes if they refused to support the President is going over about as well as you'd expect:

              Republican senators, including Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME), were taken aback. Collins reportedly shook her head and said, “That’s not true,” while Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), another Republican Democrats hope to win over to push for witnesses, said, “That’s where he lost me.”

              “Not only have I never heard the ‘head on the pike’ line but also I know of no Republican senator who has been threatened in any way by anyone in the administration,” Collins said, according to multiple reports...

              “That is completely totally false, and all of us were shaking our heads, like where did that story come from, and Adam Schiff just kept saying it,” Sen. James Lankford (R-OK) said after the closing arguments.

              “The whole room was visibly upset on our side of it. … That’s insulting and demeaning,” he added.

              Sen. John Barrasso (R-WY) also denied that any Republican received that threat and added that Schiff “offended every Republican senator”...

              Sen. Jim Risch (R-ID) was also overheard saying, “That’s not true,” according to the Hill.

              https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2...d-pike-threat/
              Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
              But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
              Than a fool in the eyes of God


              From "Fools Gold" by Petra

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                Senator Joni Ernst talking about today's defense presentation:

                "I thought today was an incredible two hours, and within two hours, I thought that the White House counsel and their team entirely shredded the case that has been presented by the House managers. What we heard today was very concise; it was full of truths and facts, as presented by the House managers’ own witnesses. It was not filled with half-truths and personal stories.

                "What we saw today was factual, relevant to what is going on in the Senate, and it points out that there have been a lot of half-truths promulgated by the House managers and absolutely pushed by the media as well."

                https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2...-in-two-hours/

                And it seems Shifty Schiff's lie that the Trump administration threatened Republicans saying that their heads would be on pikes if they refused to support the President is going over about as well as you'd expect:

                Republican senators, including Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME), were taken aback. Collins reportedly shook her head and said, “That’s not true,” while Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), another Republican Democrats hope to win over to push for witnesses, said, “That’s where he lost me.”

                “Not only have I never heard the ‘head on the pike’ line but also I know of no Republican senator who has been threatened in any way by anyone in the administration,” Collins said, according to multiple reports...

                “That is completely totally false, and all of us were shaking our heads, like where did that story come from, and Adam Schiff just kept saying it,” Sen. James Lankford (R-OK) said after the closing arguments.

                “The whole room was visibly upset on our side of it. … That’s insulting and demeaning,” he added.

                Sen. John Barrasso (R-WY) also denied that any Republican received that threat and added that Schiff “offended every Republican senator”...

                Sen. Jim Risch (R-ID) was also overheard saying, “That’s not true,” according to the Hill.

                https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2...d-pike-threat/
                I bet, when the dust settles, you're going to find all kinda of evidence of Collusion between Trump and Schiff.

                With enemies like Schiff, who needs friends?
                The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                  Well, she's Catholic and she prays a lot.


                  Really thinking about that trip to your neck of the woods to buy you a pint and help you see the truth.
                  You might also enjoy a visit to His Majesty’s Theatre:
                  https://www.aberdeenperformingarts.c...%27s%20Theatre
                  “I think God, in creating man, somewhat overestimated his ability.” ― Oscar Wilde
                  “And if there were a God, I think it very unlikely that He would have such an uneasy vanity as to be offended by those who doubt His existence” ― Bertrand Russell
                  “not all there” - you know who you are

                  Comment


                  • Here are the six key facts presented by the defense:

                    1. The transcript proves President Trump didn't condition military aid or a meeting on anything.

                    "The paused security assistance funds aren't even mentioned on the call," Purpura said.

                    2. Ukrainian officials said they never felt pressured into investigating former Vice President Joe Biden or his son, Hunter, for corruption. They also said quid pro quo never took place.

                    3. President Zelensky and other Ukrainian officials were unaware of the paused military aide.

                    "The security assistance was paused until the end of August, over a month after the July 25th call," Purpura said.

                    4. None of the Democrats' witnesses say President Trump tied an investigation into the Bidens to the military aid or a meeting.

                    5. "The security assistance flowed on September 11th and a presidential meeting took place on September 25, without the Ukrainian government announcing any investigation," Purpura said.

                    6. President Trump has been a strong supporter of Ukraine.

                    "The Democrats' blind eye to impeach the president does not and cannot change the fact, as attested to by the Democrats' own witnesses, that President Trump has been a better friend and supporter of Ukraine than his predecessor," Purpura explained. "Those are the facts."

                    Isn't it convenient that the Democrats left out these tidbits?

                    https://townhall.com/tipsheet/bethba...-case-n2560099
                    Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                    But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                    Than a fool in the eyes of God


                    From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                    Comment


                    • Fruman recording: Why did Trump agree to get rid of Yovanovitch as early as April 2018?
                      The plot thickens.
                      “I think God, in creating man, somewhat overestimated his ability.” ― Oscar Wilde
                      “And if there were a God, I think it very unlikely that He would have such an uneasy vanity as to be offended by those who doubt His existence” ― Bertrand Russell
                      “not all there” - you know who you are

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by firstfloor View Post
                        Fruman recording: Why did Trump agree to get rid of Yovanovitch as early as April 2018?
                        The plot thickens.
                        "Get rid of"? As in.... have her 'snuffed out'? Killed? "Disappeared"?
                        The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                          "Get rid of"? As in.... have her 'snuffed out'? Killed? "Disappeared"?
                          The relevant questions are:

                          1) Who was Trump giving the order to, if no State Department officials were present?

                          2) Why would Trump expect this order to be carried out without his directing those State Department officials to do so (i.e., why relay orders to an "irregular channel"?)

                          3) Why did Trump lie about not knowing Lev Parnas and how does that lie reflect on his assertion of "no quid pro quo"?

                          --Sam
                          "I wonder about the trees. / Why do we wish to bear / Forever the noise of these / More than another noise / So close to our dwelling place?" — Robert Frost, "The Sound of Trees"

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                            "Get rid of"? As in.... have her 'snuffed out'? Killed? "Disappeared"?
                            All I know is that he’s not being very presidential:

                            “Get rid of her! Get her out tomorrow. I don’t care. Get her out tomorrow. Take her out. Okay? Do it,” Trump says.
                            “I think God, in creating man, somewhat overestimated his ability.” ― Oscar Wilde
                            “And if there were a God, I think it very unlikely that He would have such an uneasy vanity as to be offended by those who doubt His existence” ― Bertrand Russell
                            “not all there” - you know who you are

                            Comment


                            • Interesting analysis from one of my favorite sources:

                              White House Counsel Patrick Philbin explains why House subpoenas were illegitimate: the subpoena power was never authorized; the initiating subpoena power was never voted on.

                              Additionally, and specifically by design, absent a penalty for non-compliance, which factually makes a subpoena a ‘subpoena’, the Executive Branch had no constitutional pathway or process to engage an appellate review by federal courts. Make no mistake, this was a pre-planned purposeful trick within the Pelosi, Schiff and Lawfare road-map.

                              The House motive here, the forethought within their design, is very important now because it explains why they are vociferously demanding witnesses in the Senate. The House plan was to work around the ability of the executive branch to go to court. The managers are now attempting to execute that plan, along with a manufactured political talking point, in the Senate trial.

                              The House intended for this to unfold exactly as it is happening.

                              ...

                              CTH noted the structural issue last August, and the issue remained throughout the heavily manipulated proceedings. None of the House requests for testimony or documents held any enforcement authority because the House did not follow the constitutional process.

                              The House was not issuing subpoenas, it was issuing letters requesting voluntary witness participation and document production. Recently the DOJ Office of Legal Counsel explained this issue in a lengthy legal finding that leads to the same conclusion.

                              https://townhall.com/tipsheet/bethba...-case-n2560099
                              Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                              But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                              Than a fool in the eyes of God


                              From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Sam View Post
                                The relevant questions are:

                                1) Who was Trump giving the order to, if no State Department officials were present?

                                2) Why would Trump expect this order to be carried out without his directing those State Department officials to do so (i.e., why relay orders to an "irregular channel"?)

                                3) Why did Trump lie about not knowing Lev Parnas and how does that lie reflect on his assertion of "no quid pro quo"?

                                --Sam
                                Is it okay if I reject your hidden premise that if none of these questions can be answered your satisfaction that it proves Trump is guilty?
                                Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                                But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                                Than a fool in the eyes of God


                                From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by little_monkey, Yesterday, 04:19 PM
                                7 responses
                                55 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Sparko
                                by Sparko
                                 
                                Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
                                42 responses
                                237 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post whag
                                by whag
                                 
                                Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
                                25 responses
                                105 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post rogue06
                                by rogue06
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
                                33 responses
                                194 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Roy
                                by Roy
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
                                73 responses
                                322 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Working...
                                X