|
HootTheOwl posted:That's not an advantage. That's the opposite of an advantage. A court saying "this is unnecessary" is the advantage. Holding the vote anyways throws that advantage away. ...it really doesn't. They've already been collecting depositions and making a case; now they get to bring all that stuff public, which Republicans do not want, despite their protestations about "transparency".
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2019 22:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 06:43 |
|
|
FizFashizzle posted:Also at this point enough house republicans have come out against the President (softly of course) that I'm curious to see which way a lot of them break. Is that the point? To just test which republicans are willing to break?
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2019 22:06
|
|
|
CascadeBeta posted:How brave of you to take that stance when it's not your neck on the line. They get to start their redemption once they prove that they give a poo poo and start doing better. It doesn't start with us trying drag them out of the river kicking and screaming. I'm sick and tired of getting spat in my face for trying. This is an excellent point that touches on the fact that while change is possible the person has to be in the right frame of mind to change themselves. Until that frame of mind presents itself you might as well scream at all of the nazis on twitter for all the good it will do you. There is no crafted merit-based argument that will switch a person from reacting emotionally to acting logically. And if you do find one, let me know.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2019 22:06
|
|
|
HootTheOwl posted:That's not an advantage. That's the opposite of an advantage. A court saying "this is unnecessary" is the advantage. Holding the vote anyways throws that advantage away. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2019 22:06
|
|
|
HootTheOwl posted:That's not an advantage. That's the opposite of an advantage. A court saying "this is unnecessary" is the advantage. Holding the vote anyways throws that advantage away. this makes no sense whatsoever and your posting since that dumb "lol nancy pelosi" post are emblematic of having said something dumb, being called out on it, and being unable to defend it and unwilling to just admit "well that was stupid, my mistake"
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2019 22:06
|
|
|
Fritz Coldcockin posted:...it really doesn't. Having everything you wanted without having to give into gop demands is a better position than being in the same position and limiting yourself with whatever the contents of the vote are.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2019 22:07
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/GOPLeader/status/1188914973638057989?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw https://twitter.com/RepMarkMeadows/...19%2Findex.html Daily reminder that the GOP is a death cult
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2019 22:07
|
|
|
Fritz Coldcockin posted:...it really doesn't. They've already been collecting depositions and making a case; now they get to bring all that stuff public, which Republicans do not want, despite their protestations about "transparency". as a reminder, the white house's stonewalling letter originally was going to demand that the house hold a vote and then yanked that part after republicans advised they really didn't actually want a vote
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2019 22:07
|
|
|
I cant even think of a moderate Republican
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2019 22:08
|
|
|
HootTheOwl posted:Having everything you wanted without having to give into gop demands is a better position than being in the same position and limiting yourself with whatever the contents of the vote are. And if this was being done within a week of them declaring the opening of impeachment proceedings, I'd agree with you. But they've gathered tons of material from the depositions, they just witnessed the open defiance of their first subpoena FOR a deposition, and they just got a favorable court ruling that says "yes, your impeachment proceedings are in fact legitimate". A vote now is icing on the cake, not the cake. Unoriginal Name posted:I cant even think of a moderate Republican Will Hurd? He's from Texas and he's quitting, and I'd put him as one of the ones most likely to support whatever this is on Thursday. Willo567 posted:https://twitter.com/GOPLeader/status/1188914973638057989?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw  And the award for "Most Predictable Response To Stimuli" goes to...
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2019 22:09
|
|
|
FizFashizzle posted:Also at this point enough house republicans have come out against the President (softly of course) that I'm curious to see which way a lot of them break. I keep seeing this and wondering whether it matters or whether the electorate is so polarized and gaslit that attack ads about betraying Trump won't even land. Like it feels like Democrat 4d Chess and they really are the loving worst at that. They're only doing this well playing against the hamburdlers guy.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2019 22:10
|
|
|
HootTheOwl posted:Is that the point? To just test which republicans are willing to break? There's a huge difference in public sentiment (born out by polling) on this whole thing compared to a month ago. There's going to be far more pressure on many House Rs on this public vote. Yeah, its a move that takes away a Republican talking point and also makes them squirm. It's fine. There's not advantage to give away.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2019 22:10
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:as a reminder, the white house's stonewalling letter originally was going to demand that the house hold a vote and then yanked that part after republicans advised they really didn't actually want a vote it's like people are being led around by the nose via GOP talking points instead of understanding the legal and strategic maneuvering going on here. the GOP doesn't want those depositions to leak or go public. they will craft whatever argument they can to reach that goal. even if it is 100% the opposite to the argument they were just making. They were crowing about transparency, and here it is. all of a sudden, oh poo poo, we can't have these depositions go public. that would be a travesty! stop being led around by the nose.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2019 22:11
|
|
|
Fritz Coldcockin posted:And if this was being done within a week of them declaring the opening of impeachment proceedings, I'd agree with you. But they've gathered tons of material from the depositions, they just witnessed the open defiance of their first subpoena FOR a deposition, and they just got a favorable court ruling that says "yes, your impeachment proceedings are in fact legitimate". Isn't there a whole slate of witnesses who were still going to testify this week? I said earlier that if this vote was going to begin a new public phase of the impeachment inquiry it was fine, but no one is saying it is. Everyone just keeps saying "no you see, when you have a position of strength it's actually smart and good to validate your opposition's arguments by doing what they wanted the whole time"
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2019 22:11
|
|
|
Fritz Coldcockin posted:Will Hurd? He's from Texas and he's quitting, and I'd put him as one of the ones most likely to support whatever this is on Thursday. Yeah Will Hurd is the only one that comes to mind. He's to the left of most of the GOP on a lot of things (gun control, LGBT rights, ACA, against the Trump Wall even though he's from TX), and in the House Intel committee hearings he was actually asking pertinent questions (usually related to cybersecurity re: elections). As you said, he's retiring at the end of his term so he has nothing to lose by voting for it. That said I don't consider anybody a lock that has an R next to their name.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2019 22:11
|
|
|
So the Repubs are gonna try and see if the whole "Holding a vote is admitting it was a sham" thing is gonna stick huh. I don't understand why it's seen as if any of the GOP/Conservatives/Republicans will do anything in good faith. They are irredeemable as is any Trump supporter by now, there is no reasoning here, they know better and still choose what they are.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2019 22:11
|
|
|
Unoriginal Name posted:I cant even think of a moderate Republican the thing is that the amount of actually vulnerable house seats means that even if this is only a bad vote for 5-10 house republicans that's still quite handy
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2019 22:12
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:No it doesn't. stop buying into right wing framing. Maybe send that advice Pelosi's way who just ficked us.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2019 22:13
|
|
|
How are u posted:Because she thinks its more advantageous to do it than to not do it at this point. But clearly you, dead forums poster HootTheOwl, know better. "you need to take a vote!!" "no, we don't" "YOU NEED TO TAKE A VOTE!!" "no, we don't" "YOU NEED TO TAKE A VOTE!!!" "ok, we will." "I THOUGHT YOU SAID YOU DIDN'T NEED TO TAKE A VOTE!!?? YOU'RE ADMITTING YOU'RE WRONG!!!" "actually we still don't" LOOK HOW WRONG THEY WERE THIS ENTIRE TIME!!!! "is there a smaller font? i don't like making a fuss."
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2019 22:13
|
|
|
Man, imagine being a representative who voted against this very popular impeachment inquiry to make things public. Now imagine being a Republican representative voting to investigate Trump.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2019 22:14
|
|
|
HootTheOwl posted:Isn't there a whole slate of witnesses who were still going to testify this week? I said earlier that if this vote was going to begin a new public phase of the impeachment inquiry it was fine, but no one is saying it is. Everyone just keeps saying "no you see, when you have a position of strength it's actually smart and good to validate your opposition's arguments by doing what they wanted the whole time" I mean, I guess if I were a professional strawmanner this is what I'd see too...?
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2019 22:14
|
|
|
HootTheOwl posted:Isn't there a whole slate of witnesses who were still going to testify this week? I said earlier that if this vote was going to begin a new public phase of the impeachment inquiry it was fine, but no one is saying it is. Everyone just keeps saying "no you see, when you have a position of strength it's actually smart and good to validate your opposition's arguments by doing what they wanted the whole time" that's what the vote is. it's announcing what the procedures will be for step 2 and beyond, not prematurely ending step 1.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2019 22:14
|
|
|
How are u posted:There's a huge difference in public sentiment (born out by polling) on this whole thing compared to a month ago. There's going to be far more pressure on many House Rs on this public vote. Yeah, its a move that takes away a Republican talking point and also makes them squirm. It's fine. There's not advantage to give away. The advantage was that the courts said how you were proceeding was fine. Now you've made that advantageous court ruling irrelevant. Or as I put it: Gave away.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2019 22:14
|
|
|
Fritz Coldcockin posted:I mean, I guess if I were a professional strawmanner this is what I'd see too...? Is your back button broken? Or do you just have How are U and Evil Weasel on ignore?
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2019 22:15
|
|
|
HootTheOwl posted:The advantage was that the courts said how you were proceeding was fine. Except the court ruling can be appealed and appealed again. This can't.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2019 22:15
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/mj_lee/status/1188925717205176322 this is going to be good tv
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2019 22:16
|
|
|
1glitch0 posted:Maybe send that advice Pelosi's way who just ficked us. I fail to see how.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2019 22:16
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:https://twitter.com/mj_lee/status/1188925717205176322 Please God let the dog poo poo on his shoes.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2019 22:17
|
|
|
HootTheOwl posted:The advantage was that the courts said how you were proceeding was fine. What was the advantage? Just to say "nuh uh, what we're doing is legal!" I'd rather have Republican House members have to put their names on a vote after a month of huge increases in public support for the impeachment inquiry.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2019 22:17
|
|
|
I absolutely cannot wait to find out that that is, in fact, not a picture of the dog because our dumbass reality is folding itself in the most bizarre, beautiful way evilweasel posted:https://twitter.com/mj_lee/status/1188925717205176322 e: yep this is not a picture of the dog and this is the hill I’m dying on PenguinKnight fucked around with this message at 22:20 on Oct 28, 2019 |
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2019 22:17
|
|
|
HootTheOwl posted:Is your back button broken? Or do you just have How are U and Evil Weasel on ignore? I was referring to your bullshit question wherein you grossly mischaracterize our point of view because you can't argue with our actual point of view, big guy.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2019 22:17
|
|
|
How are u posted:What was the advantage? Just to say "nuh uh, what we're doing is legal!"
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2019 22:18
|
|
|
drat, this dog stuff is a smart ruse, all about this good boi
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2019 22:19
|
|
|
HootTheOwl posted:Is your back button broken? Or do you just have How are U and Evil Weasel on ignore? you haven't been able to respond to a single post i've made in any coherent way except to hope that just obstinately and increasingly incoherently restating your position over and over will make people stop pointing out you were wrong, so i'm not sure why you're mentioning me HootTheOwl posted:The advantage was that the courts said how you were proceeding was fine. this is just word salad that would embarrass trump. i, and others, have explained the advantage in simple, short words and it seems like you are entirely incapable of responding to it. the reason they are going to hold public hearings is because the evidence is incredibly damning and they want to make it public and that has the very helpful side effect of demolishing the only talking point senate republicans have managed to agree to use
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2019 22:19
|
|
|
I'm not sure I understand the lionizing (heh) of this dog. I mean it's cool or whatever that a dog chased a man until he exploded, but it seems to kind of downplay the troops involvement. Which I would think Trump wouldn't want to do?
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2019 22:20
|
|
|
Fritz Coldcockin posted:I meant your bullshit question wherein you grossly mischaracterize our point of view because you can't argue with our actual point of view, big guy. What was the mischaracterization? That there isn't now like thirty posts describing this "advantageous position" Pelosi was in after the court ruling? Or are you arguing with the history that republicans have demanded this vote for a while now?
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2019 22:20
|
|
|
HootTheOwl posted:Backed by a judge's ruling, yes. A judge's ruling that can't be appealed, as just explained to you
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2019 22:20
|
|
|
God, I hope that Trump doesn't traumatize that dog and try to pet him.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2019 22:21
|
|
|
HootTheOwl posted:Backed by a judge's ruling, yes. oh my god you have no idea what you are doing or talking about. The judge's ruling is only useful now that they are taking a vote. it means that there's jack the GOP can do to stop the info from being used and made public. They've been crowing over transparency for weeks. Now that they can vote on a transparent process, they will all vote no. it completely removes their transparency talking point, and makes them founder and slam on the table louder, with an even weaker position.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2019 22:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 06:43 |
|
|
Fritz Coldcockin posted:
HootTheOwl posted:Good work, Nancy!
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2019 22:22
|
|
