Impeach the MotherF%@KER!

[ryoder 1,590]

8 minute speech from the last remaining GOP senator with a spine:

 

[RonD1120 62]

Article One: 52 - 48 Not Guilty

Article Two: 53 - 47 Not Guilty

President Donald Trump has beat the best minds that the intellectual elite, liberal, socialist, communist Democrats had to over.

MAGA 2020 - 2024

Now The Storm

Now The Great Awakening

[sfzombie13 324]

17 minutes ago, RonD1120 said:

Article One: 52 - 48 Not Guilty

Article Two: 53 - 47 Not Guilty

President Donald Trump has beat the best minds that the intellectual elite, liberal, socialist, communist Democrats had to over.

MAGA 2020 - 2024

Now The Storm

Now The Great Awakening

yeah, right.  traitors the lot of them.  one had a spine, at least.  i cannot wait to celebrate the election this year! 

 

and he is still impeached and always will be...

Edited February 5, 2020 by sfzombie13
another thought

[wolfriverjoe 1,523]

To be fair, the entire Republican party ignored the wishes of the people when they decided not to hear witnesses or allow new evidence.
For the first time ever in an impeachment trial in US history (not just the Presidential ones).

McConnell threatened blackmailed & bribed the R Senators into being simple pawns for Trump.

On the positive side, the House committees are still investigating. 

[airdvr 210]

Sorry...in the case of the People vs. William Jefferson Clinton...

On January 25, Senator Robert Byrd moved for dismissals of both articles of impeachment for lack of merit. On the following day, Representative Bryant moved to call witnesses to the trial, a question the Senate had scrupulously avoided to that point. In both cases, the Senate voted to deliberate on the question in private session, rather than public, televised procedure. On January 27, the Senate voted on both motions in public session; the motion to dismiss failed on a nearly party line vote of 56–44, while the motion to depose witnesses passed by the same margin. A day later, the Senate voted down motions to move directly to a vote on the articles of impeachment and to suppress videotaped depositions of the witnesses from public release, Senator Russ Feingold again voting with the Republicans.

[SkyDekker 1,465]

1 hour ago, airdvr said:

Sorry...in the case of the People vs. William Jefferson Clinton...

On January 25, Senator Robert Byrd moved for dismissals of both articles of impeachment for lack of merit. On the following day, Representative Bryant moved to call witnesses to the trial, a question the Senate had scrupulously avoided to that point. In both cases, the Senate voted to deliberate on the question in private session, rather than public, televised procedure. On January 27, the Senate voted on both motions in public session; the motion to dismiss failed on a nearly party line vote of 56–44, while the motion to depose witnesses passed by the same margin. A day later, the Senate voted down motions to move directly to a vote on the articles of impeachment and to suppress videotaped depositions of the witnesses from public release, Senator Russ Feingold again voting with the Republicans.

What are you disputing? Are you claiming no witnesses were heard in the Clinton impeachment? Could you explain what happened in that proceeding from February 1st to 3rd?

[brenthutch 444]

On 1/20/2020 at 4:31 PM, billvon said:

Liberals are winning, Ron.  Women can vote and own property.  Blacks can marry whites.  Blacks have all the same rights as whites have.  Gays have rights.   We have a free market.  (Yes, that's a liberal plank.)  We have reduced pollution.  We have a space program that now does nothing but scientific research.  We have the right to free speech, the right to own guns, the right to a trial by jury and the right to be secure in our home and possessions.  We have enacted limits on the power of government.  We have privatized industries from airlines to phone service to delivery services.  These will all continue - and are all a result of progressive liberalism changing the way things worked years (or decades, or centuries) before.

You can keep hoping for a return to the days where marriage is restricted by race and orientation, but you will fail.  Progress will continue and we will all be better for it.

WOW Bill we are almost totally simpatico.  You sound more like a Libertarian than a flaming progressive.

[TriGirl 318]

8 hours ago, airdvr said:

Sorry...in the case of the People vs. William Jefferson Clinton...

On January 25, Senator Robert Byrd moved for dismissals of both articles of impeachment for lack of merit. On the following day, Representative Bryant moved to call witnesses to the trial, a question the Senate had scrupulously avoided to that point. In both cases, the Senate voted to deliberate on the question in private session, rather than public, televised procedure. On January 27, the Senate voted on both motions in public session; the motion to dismiss failed on a nearly party line vote of 56–44, while the motion to depose witnesses passed by the same margin. A day later, the Senate voted down motions to move directly to a vote on the articles of impeachment and to suppress videotaped depositions of the witnesses from public release, Senator Russ Feingold again voting with the Republicans.

However, in the Clinton case, the White House cooperated with House subpoenas.  The president himself testified.  In the Trump case, the Senate would not have had to worry about witnesses had the legal subpoenas been honored.  Bottom line: the administration thumbed its nose at the oversight authority of Congress, ignored legally binding summons to answer questions and participate in the investigation.  And the Senate Republicans allowed it.  This is the very definition of a Constitutional crisis.

[JoeWeber 2,720]

9 hours ago, brenthutch said:

WOW Bill we are almost totally simpatico.  You sound more like a Libertarian than a flaming progressive.

O.K., I'll bite: which of the above do you not support?

[brenthutch 444]

35 minutes ago, JoeWeber said:

O.K., I'll bite: which of the above do you not support?

I support EVERY items listed above. But Bill is a bit confused, he is conflating classical liberalism with progressivism.  Bill is definitely NOT a liberal in the classical sense. (and neither are you) 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism

 

Edited February 6, 2020 by brenthutch

[JoeWeber 2,720]

8 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

I support EVERY one of you items you listed above.  We differ on many of the topics you did not touch on, primarily the ability of the government to control the climate.

Has anyone on this site claimed that the government has the ability to control climate? My impression is that, at most, non-deniers believe that we, with or without the government, can affect climate. 

[brenthutch 444]

If one believes human behavior is responsible for climate related disasters, then it follows reason that control of human behavior can prevent them.  That is why the non-problem of AGW has morphed into a religion on the left.  The idea of being able to control human behavior by controlling their access to energy (and increasingly food) is so appealing.  An EU commissioner even said "even if the science is wrong the policy is right"

Edited February 6, 2020 by brenthutch

[airdvr 210]

14 hours ago, SkyDekker said:

What are you disputing? Are you claiming no witnesses were heard in the Clinton impeachment? Could you explain what happened in that proceeding from February 1st to 3rd?

I don't think taped closed door depositions is the same as presenting witnesses.

[JoeWeber 2,720]

55 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

If one believe human behavior is responsible for climate related disasters, then it follows reason that control of human behavior can prevent them.  That is why the non-problem of AGW has morphed into a religion on the left.  The idea of being able to control human behavior by controlling their access to energy (and increasingly food) is so appealing.  An EU commissioner even said "even if the science is wrong the policy is right"

Now you're starting to sound like Ron.

[SkyDekker 1,465]

3 hours ago, airdvr said:

I don't think taped closed door depositions is the same as presenting witnesses.

I do think it is a lot more than nothing. The Trump impeachment had no witnesses presented, in public, behind closed doors or in any other form. That is not even close to being equivalent to the Clinton impeachment.

 

[turtlespeed 220]

 

5 hours ago, brenthutch said:

If one believes human behavior is responsible for climate related disasters, then it follows reason that control of human behavior can prevent them.  That is why the non-problem of AGW has morphed into a religion on the left.  The idea of being able to control human behavior by controlling their access to energy (and increasingly food) is so appealing.  An EU commissioner even said "even if the science is wrong the policy is right"

Are you familiar with the snowball effect?

Now, take that notion, and multiply it by the human population.

Would you honestly, and reasonably think that you could control the snowballs gaining speed, girth, weight and also control their direction? 

I'm going with the obvious answer, and say, "No."

I'll add, "Not with today's technology level." 

That level of tech needs to be funded and developed to be able to implement that control.

Jump on board and we can get there sooner.

 

[jakee 1,489]

10 hours ago, airdvr said:

I don't think taped closed door depositions is the same as presenting witnesses.

Ok, but that's a strange point to hang your hat on since no-one else used the phrase 'presenting witnesses'. The point you were replying to was 'hear witnesses or allow new evidence'. 

[gowlerk 2,190]

The trial resulted in two firsts. It was the first ever impeachment trial in the Senate of any kind, not just Presidential, with no witnesses heard from. The other first is it is the only Presidential impeachment trial that hade a Senator vote to convict a President of his own party. Trump is truly exceptional and will be remembered for both those things.

[brenthutch 444]

6 hours ago, turtlespeed said:

 

Are you familiar with the snowball effect?

Now, take that notion, and multiply it by the human population.

Would you honestly, and reasonably think that you could control the snowballs gaining speed, girth, weight and also control their direction? 

I'm going with the obvious answer, and say, "No."

I'll add, "Not with today's technology level." 

That level of tech needs to be funded and developed to be able to implement that control.

Jump on board and we can get there sooner.

 

The problem with your analogy is that it presupposes inevitable population growth.  Just look at any developed society, their population growth rates are zero to negative. This Malthusian notion of "we are all going to run out of...." is just soft thinking.

[turtlespeed 220]

17 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

The problem with your analogy is that it presupposes inevitable population growth.  Just look at any developed society, their population growth rates are zero to negative. This Malthusian notion of "we are all going to run out of...." is just soft thinking.

Nope - I'm talking about the population we have right now.

 

[brenthutch 444]

11 minutes ago, turtlespeed said:

Nope - I'm talking about the population we have right now.

 

The population we have right now is doing fine.  Global poverty rate plummeting and life expectancy rising.

[turtlespeed 220]

23 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

The population we have right now is doing fine.  Global poverty rate plummeting and life expectancy rising.

For now, yes. The snowballs that have started rolling are only small to medium sized.

[brenthutch 444]

1 minute ago, turtlespeed said:

For now, yes. The snowballs that have started rolling are only small to medium sized.

It's funny how disaster is always just right around the corner, yet never quite seems to arrive.

[turtlespeed 220]

1 minute ago, brenthutch said:

It's funny how disaster is always just right around the corner, yet never quite seems to arrive.

Its funny how you think that I was talking about a disaster.

I'm talking about an issue that will keep compounding itself.

 

[brenthutch 444]

Just now, turtlespeed said:

Its funny how you think that I was talking about a disaster.

I'm talking about an issue that will keep compounding itself.

 

Yet it never does