|
J.A.B.C. posted:Popehat has some bad opinions here and there but this is gold.
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2019 08:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 13:54 |
|
|
Rigel posted:I see this a lot, but this is not true either. There might be 30-35 GOP votes in the Senate to throw Trump out if and only if the vote were both secret and if a magic spell were cast preventing anyone from claiming they voted no. It must be difficult to go through life so fearfully.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2019 08:43
|
|
|
Any new polling? I fear that we are in our leftist bubble here, chuckling about how hosed Trump is while the average public doesn't care or for whatever stupid loving reason likes him more because of this. Would be good to get some numbers.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2019 08:49
|
|
|
Majorian posted:This is 100% real. I had to look it up to see for myself. The whistleblower handed impeachment to her on a loving platter, and she still probably would have dragged her heels if Trump hadn't also gone on TV and admitted all the crimes as well. If anything she's barricaded in her office trying to brainstorm some way - any way at all - to still gently caress this up.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2019 08:51
|
|
|
Trump supporters lie in polls anyway.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2019 08:51
|
|
|
Kill Bristol posted:Any new polling? I fear that we are in our leftist bubble here, chuckling about how hosed Trump is while the average public doesn't care or for whatever stupid loving reason likes him more because of this. Would be good to get some numbers. I wonder that too but it actually seems to be for real, and I think will only pass if the Democrats let up on him, and they can't overlook his bullshit this time. The Democrats are willing to work through recess and the same GOP excuses don't look like they'll hold like they did with Mueller. Someone earlier mentioned that Trump is easy to launder when he keeps his poo poo brief and mostly online but if he continues to have public meltdowns along with Guiliani then just enough Republicans might get shook just enough for us to roll over that dumb piece of poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2019 09:00
|
|
|
MSDOS KAPITAL posted:No she was playing the long con waiting for the inevitable *checks notes* CIA coup of the President. She can't have people attacking another establish Democrat or their family members in the way Trump has been but the longer this draws out the worse it makes Biden look so she's between a rock and a hard place.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2019 09:04
|
|
|
Kill Bristol posted:Any new polling? I fear that we are in our leftist bubble here, chuckling about how hosed Trump is while the average public doesn't care or for whatever stupid loving reason likes him more because of this. Would be good to get some numbers. Brian Williams (or maybe Lawerence O’Donnell, doesn’t really matter) reported tonight that a recent poll since the whistleblower report first broke last week shows that public support for impeachment has followed a similar vertical trajectory as it has among House Democrats. So yeah, people are getting onboard with getting Trump the gently caress out.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2019 09:08
|
|
|
Rigel posted:I see this a lot, but this is not true either. There might be 30-35 GOP votes in the Senate to throw Trump out if and only if the vote were both secret and if a magic spell were cast preventing anyone from claiming they voted no. As long as like ten vote aquit they can claim I was one of the loyal ten later, while gleefully voting to convict now. Charlz Guybon fucked around with this message at 09:34 on Sep 27, 2019 |
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2019 09:27
|
|
|
I can’t show pictures unfortunately but I’m doing an internship at a museum and in the back catalogue they just showed me a mummy head that looked eerily like Rudy Giuliani.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2019 09:47
|
|
|
Charlz Guybon posted:Yeah, they'd lie. And what would it matter as long as they voted Yes in the trail? Trump would still be convicted.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2019 09:52
|
|
|
Cable Guy posted:This is all hypothetical though isn't it...? Would a verdict vote even be a secret ballot? What's the precedent? Is it up to the turtle? If so, does he think his interests are divested enough from donny's to allow a secret ballot? I think even 4 GOP senators who wanted to could ram it through with the Dems. That would be a public vote though.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2019 09:58
|
|
|
BigglesSWE posted:I can’t show pictures unfortunately but I’m doing an internship at a museum and in the back catalogue they just showed me a mummy head that looked eerily like Rudy Giuliani. That explains a lot! Have you actually checked to see if the mummy is in the museum - or if it's "missing"?
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2019 10:05
|
|
|
Kidney Stone posted:That explains a lot! Have you actually checked to see if the mummy is in the museum - or if it's "missing"? It was next to a bunch of mummified crocodile babies. Now I’m not the one to tag along the whole lizard overlord thing but... 
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2019 10:16
|
|
|
Inferior Third Season posted:Where are the Snowdens of yesteryear? https://twitter.com/Snowden/status/1177335274591916045 Alkydere posted:I think you're overlooking one major thing when doing the Trump:Reagan functional Alzheimer's comparison. Yes, this is what I said. Reagan talk good, Trump talk bad.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2019 11:05
|
|
|
Cable Guy posted:This is all hypothetical though isn't it...? Would a verdict vote even be a secret ballot? What's the precedent? Is it up to the turtle? If so, does he think his interests are divested enough from donny's to allow a secret ballot? The impeachment rules* say it's a standard vote with yea and nay being tallied. Interesting to note that as written, they're not required to vote on a specific threshold number of articles if there is more than one, e.g. the case cited: quote:When the presentation of evidence and argument by the managers and counsel for the respondent has concluded, the Senate as a whole meets in closed session to deliberate. Voting on whether to convict on the articles of impeachment commences upon return to open session, with yeas and nays being tallied as to each article separately.A conviction on an article of impeachment requires a two-thirds vote of those Senators present. If the respondent is convicted on one or more of the articles against him or her, the Presiding Officer will pronounce the judgment of conviction and removal. No formal vote is required for removal, as it is a necessary effect of the conviction. The Senate need not vote on all of the articles before it. Where an individual has already been convicted on one or more of the articles, the Senate may decide that subsequent votes on the remaining articles are unnecessary. Conversely, when the Senate did not convict President Andrew Johnson in the votes on three of the articles of impeachment against him, the Senate did not vote on the remaining articles. nb: they gently caress with the rules when they can get away with it so 
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2019 11:15
|
|
|
Shimrra Jamaane posted:Do you think the other world leaders ever laugh about Trump together in private? In private? Hey everyone, remember that time the UN laughed in Trumps face? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CtoZXoQ0390
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2019 11:30
|
|
|
Flesh Forge posted:The impeachment rules* say it's a standard vote with yea and nay being tallied. Interesting to note that as written, they're not required to vote on a specific threshold number of articles if there is more than one, e.g. the case cited: this sounds almost like McConnell could just say "the senate chooses not to vote on any of the articles, since we all know they'll never pass *🐢wink*" I mean, given this bullshit with Garland's seat, I would not put it past him.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2019 11:32
|
|
|
ewiley posted:this sounds almost like McConnell could just say "the senate chooses not to vote on any of the articles, since we all know they'll never pass *🐢wink*" https://www.lawfareblog.com/can-senate-decline-try-impeachment-case
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2019 11:37
|
|
|
ewiley posted:this sounds almost like McConnell could just say "the senate chooses not to vote on any of the articles, since we all know they'll never pass *🐢wink*" It really would not surprise me if he just says "wull CLEARLY there's no point in wasting our time on these blatantly false accusations, no vote required, TIME FOR LUNCH"
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2019 11:39
|
|
|
Would a Trump impeachment, unlikely as it is, actually bar him from getting elected to a second term?
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2019 11:39
|
|
|
Flesh Forge posted:It really would not surprise me if he just says "wull CLEARLY there's no point in wasting our time on these blatantly false accusations, no vote required, TIME FOR LUNCH" This would be worse for him than if he rushed through a vote in 20 minutes. lemonadesweetheart posted:Would a Trump impeachment, unlikely as it is, actually bar him from getting elected to a second term? I'm not sure; but given that he'd be dealing with several state-level crimes the minute he no longer holds the Presidency AND he'd be pushing 80 by the time he got to run again, I'm not sure he'd be capable of doing it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2019 11:41
|
|
|
e: sorry, doublepost.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2019 11:42
|
|
|
Fritz Coldcockin posted:This would be worse for him than if he rushed through a vote in 20 minutes. I'd like to believe that, but on the other hand, Merrick Garland.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2019 11:45
|
|
|
Flesh Forge posted:I'd like to believe that, but on the other hand, Merrick Garland. This isn't that. Sitting on an impeachment vote will hurt any GOP senator who's even remotely vulnerable, moreso even than if they cast a vote that pissed off the chuds. McConnell wants this to go away. Sitting on it will achieve the opposite effect--and remember, Mitch himself is up for reelection in November, so holding a snap vote to exonerate Lord Pissbaby will help him out far more than ignoring it and hoping it goes away.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2019 11:51
|
|
|
Flesh Forge posted:I'd like to believe that, but on the other hand, Merrick Garland. And that's both hurt and helped him. He's running on it in Kentucky, but that only appeals to the Fox News crowd who don't give a poo poo and hated Obama. That move turned off a lot of people in his home state, which shows in his approval numbers. Now we're doing an impeachment, where every single news source is going to be saturated with coverage. It's not just Fox news; it will be every paper on every newstand at the gas station, it'll be on the radio, it'll be on local news. It will penetrate the Fox News sphere. And it looks loving awful for the President, and it's very easy to understand. If McConnell blocks this, that will all be on him. He might save the rest of the vulnerable republican senators, but he would possibly eat poo poo for it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2019 11:52
|
|
|
drat, yeah, the US government really is just a bunch of gentlemen's agreements and assumptions of good faith that just breaks down when you have pernicious actors like McConnell in power with unbeatable majorities and a willingness to thumb their nose at the rest of the country.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2019 11:52
|
|
|
7c Nickel posted:In private? Hey everyone, remember that time the UN laughed in Trumps face? Trump cultivating blatant disrespect for American power, the true anti-imperialist president
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2019 12:02
|
|
|
Inferior Third Season posted:Where are the Snowdens of yesteryear? I appreciate this even if the others thought you were talking about Edward.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2019 12:22
|
|
|
SocketWrench posted:I'm waiting to see him crash and burn. He will positively do the non literal version of dousing everything in gas and burning it down. Maybe with an attempt at the literal version He thinks the Republican party's entire job at this point is to protect him. If it looks like they're going to get rid of him, hes going to try to bring the entire Republican party with him. He got kind of flustered the other day and implicated pence. Who knows what will come out of his rotted pumpkin head if the end really comes?
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2019 12:47
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/realpresssecbot/status/1177541365191692288 Trump is mad about the difference between Little, Liddle, and Liddle’ Joke option of Liddle-
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2019 12:50
|
|
|
mdemone posted:I appreciate this even if the others thought you were talking about Edward. Catch 22 is unjustifiably unread today.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2019 12:50
|
|
|
https://mobile.twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1177539052683309056 https://mobile.twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1177543513015246852 https://mobile.twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1177543516236500997 https://mobile.twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1177548939207352320 https://mobile.twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1177548941644238851
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2019 12:51
|
|
|
That's, uh... Lot to unpack there.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2019 12:52
|
|
|
I think he might be mad.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2019 12:53
|
|
|
Meatball posted:He thinks the Republican party's entire job at this point is to protect him. If it looks like they're going to get rid of him, hes going to try to bring the entire Republican party with him. It basically is. Trump is the GOPs last cling to power. They need an executive who will sign all their bullshit bills and stack courts with their ghouls to keep their power despite not having the majority pretty much anywhere in the US. If the GOP tosses Trump after feeding their base all that red meat it’ll totally destroy them at this point.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2019 12:54
|
|
|
wo-kay then
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2019 12:55
|
|
|
ThisIsJohnWayne posted:Catch 22 is unjustifiably unread today. I'm slightly upset that I didn't recognize the reference to my favourite book of all time. I guess I better start reading it again. Also Trump sure know how to sound innocent: "It was very legal, you guys!"
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2019 12:56
|
|
|
Donald's writing these on his phone while he's in the bathroom right?
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2019 12:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 13:54 |
|
|
Who is standing outside my office yelling at me to resign? I will never resign.
|
|
#
?
Sep 27, 2019 12:59
|
|