|
All the handwringing isn't gonna matter when a couple of million Trump voters check the box for Bernie Sanders and a moderate uptick in <34 year old voters gives a 15+ million win to take back the Senate.
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 14:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 22:55 |
|
|
Happy Im🍑ment, ya'll.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 14:54
|
|
|
I like how #MerryImpeachmas and #ImpeachmentDay are top 2 trending hashtags on twitter right now. It must be driving him nuts.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 14:58
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/ErinBanco/status/1207298471092523008
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 15:03
|
|
|
Six or seven hours for this process? Also, lol motion to adjourn. Oh wait, that might explain why it's going to take so long. Pubs are going to make this as drawn out as possible for... reasons?
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 15:04
|
|
|
Canuckistan posted:Six or seven hours for this process? They can't please Trump with the process so they will try to tank the ratings for him.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 15:06
|
|
|
Canuckistan posted:Six or seven hours for this process? final votes not anticipated until around 7pm
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 15:06
|
|
|
Can we just go home guys you all being mean ☹️
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 15:08
|
|
|
eke out posted:final votes not anticipated until around 7pm to be clear: this is probably optimistic and it'll be hours later than that or maybe tomorrow morning
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 15:13
|
|
|
The parliamentarian is gonna keep a bottle of some stiff stuff nearby for the amount of times he's going to dig through the rules on everything the Republicans will throw to slow things down.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 15:20
|
|
|
oxsnard posted:Just lol if you think a torrent of crime evidence isn't going to surface over the next year, making the rushed senate trial look worse with every passing day. It's gonna be great Trump's the political equivalent of some meth addicted second cousin who has already spent 14 of the last 20 years incarcerated. You don't know exactly what he'll get in trouble for this time, but it's just a matter of time and he's not about to change now
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 15:21
|
|
|
Canuckistan posted:Six or seven hours for this process? They're kind of staging a ghetto filibuster insomuch as they're going to run the clock as long as they can just to 'stick it to the dems' on the committee.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 15:22
|
|
|
Evidently Chuck Schumer has the authority to call votes during the impeachment, so at the very least, he can put every republican on record for multiple votes to request documents and witnesses. So apart from them not convicting we can get any vulnerable senator on the record of basically being part of the coverup as well.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 15:28
|
|
|
God CBS has some dumb loving talking heads. "There is not a lot of conscience left... on both sides" No... just no.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 15:29
|
|
|
refleks posted:God CBS has some dumb loving talking heads. Well, they aren't really wrong.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 15:30
|
|
|
eke out posted:to be clear: this is probably optimistic and it'll be hours later than that or maybe tomorrow morning Kind of expecting Pelosi to pull a Nadler-esque move and last-minute postpone the vote to tomorrow. No possible way it happens before 7-8 at the earliest.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 15:33
|
|
|
Retro42 posted:Kind of expecting Pelosi to pull a Nadler-esque move and last-minute postpone the vote to tomorrow. No possible way it happens before 7-8 at the earliest. Yeah if they try to drag it out so impeachment vote happens in the middle of the night she should just postpone it to tomorrow and avoid the "Midnight Coup!!!" they'll try to paint it as
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 15:43
|
|
|
Retro42 posted:Kind of expecting Pelosi to pull a Nadler-esque move and last-minute postpone the vote to tomorrow. No possible way it happens before 7-8 at the earliest. To be fair, it's gotta be difficult to keep it together in hour 12 of bad-faith arguing with tens of people. I'd need a goddamn break, too.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 15:44
|
|
|
Retro42 posted:Kind of expecting Pelosi to pull a Nadler-esque move and last-minute postpone the vote to tomorrow. No possible way it happens before 7-8 at the earliest. Presumably Republicans are trying to do what they did in the committee and delay it say they can go out screaming "IN THE DEAD OF THE NIGHT WHILE YOU WERE SLEEPING DEMS VOTED TO IMPEACH!" So hopefully everyone's smart enough to have that vote first thing tomorrow after all of this today. Really all Republicans can do is toss themselves into the cogs as much as possible and hope the left gives them something they can use to look good in front of daddy.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 15:45
|
|
|
Im guessing there is zero point watching this right now yeah?
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 15:45
|
|
|
But at this point if they move the previous question, what actual damage would be done? Unfortunately they'll  and let the heads talk indefinitely, but the whole point of setting limits on debate is to prevent topics that are not germane to the question.Will the Democrats each independently move calling each of the viable witnesses in the Senate? Should be able to stretch out the trial by a few weeks.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 15:46
|
|
|
The Dem no votes on these motions should give a sense of how many will vote no on the articles.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 15:46
|
|
|
CyberPingu posted:Im guessing there is zero point watching this right now yeah? for sure at some point later there'll probably be some good speeches but the timetable is unclear
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 15:52
|
|
|
Retro42 posted:The Dem no votes on these motions should give a sense of how many will vote no on the articles. i assume most of those people won't even show for these
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 15:56
|
|
|
refleks posted:God CBS has some dumb loving talking heads. Yeah, I can't stand any of the major outlet coverage so more and more I've been going with the PBS NewsHour feed for stuff like this. The commentary is very process-focused, the folks have actual calm conversations, it's extremely no-frills, and I get to feel like I'm supporting my perpetually poorly-lit pretend girlfriend Lisa Desjardin. CyberPingu posted:Im guessing there is zero point watching this right now yeah?
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 16:01
|
|
|
Who are the 14 not voting cowards!?
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 16:02
|
|
|
Pissed Ape Sexist posted:Yeah, I can't stand any of the major outlet coverage so more and more I've been going with the PBS NewsHour feed for stuff like this. The commentary is very process-focused, the folks have actual calm conversations, it's extremely no-frills, and I get to feel like I'm supporting my perpetually poorly-lit pretend girlfriend Lisa Desjardin. The Newshour feed is a pro move.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 16:05
|
|
|
HootTheOwl posted:Who are the 14 not voting cowards!? 13 bored people + Steve Scalise's ball
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 16:06
|
|
|
Did Cole just move the goalposts again? He didn’t claim that Ukraine didn’t know, just that they never investigated it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 16:18
|
|
|
the repub tactic to kill everyone through boredom may just work yet
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 16:34
|
|
|
It's 50/50 whether or not the repubs chose her to speak because she's most likely to get people to shut off the TV extremely quickly. Holy drat.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 16:42
|
|
|
Rep. Lesko outta nowhere claiming Democrats are tearing families apart.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 16:43
|
|
|
What is the Republican interpretation of "high crimes and misdemeanors"? As a non-lawyer, that sounds like a pretty broad catch-all.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 16:44
|
|
|
Democrats are tearing families apart  *literally supports separating families at border*
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 16:44
|
|
|
oxsnard posted:All the handwringing isn't gonna matter when a couple of million Trump voters check the box for Bernie Sanders and a moderate uptick in <34 year old voters gives a 15+ million win to take back the Senate. It's important to note those same "If not Bernie then gently caress this world" voters plugged their nose and voted for Trump over Hilary. If Bernie doesn't make the cut again, they will go right back to voting for Trump because they are all pieces tankie of dog poo poo. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 16:44
|
|
|
Baronash posted:What is the Republican interpretation of "high crimes and misdemeanors"? As a non-lawyer, that sounds like a pretty broad catch-all. It has no legal definition and has never been ruled on by SCOTUS.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 16:44
|
|
|
Baronash posted:What is the Republican interpretation of "high crimes and misdemeanors"? As a non-lawyer, that sounds like a pretty broad catch-all. I suspect the Republican interpretation of that phrase reads a lot like the Narcissist's Creed. Unless it's a Democrat in question, then they turn on the fake moral outrage.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 16:45
|
|
|
Scooter_McCabe posted:It's important to note those same "If not Bernie then gently caress this world" voters plugged their nose and voted for Trump over Hilary. If Bernie doesn't make the cut again, they will go right back to voting for Trump because they are all pieces tankie of dog poo poo. This is not the thread for this argument, stop
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 16:46
|
|
|
Who is convinced by this garbage? Even their own voters have to know better. "Why did you move for impeachment before the phone call?" They didn't. Some of us wanted to impeach for other issues, but that's not what got voted on. "Why is this the only impeechment that started in the Intel comittee?" There's been literally 3 other impeachments, which one is the most analogous? Maybe you can squint and ask why Trump didn't get a lawyer for the intel committee, or the witnessess (Because it's not a trial, and the GOP took that role on his behalf, and he was offered one when they actually recommended the case the the judiciary.) but can't they at least make an effort at honesty?
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 16:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 22:55 |
|
|
mdemone posted:It has no legal definition and has never been ruled on by SCOTUS. the main things every reasonable person agrees upon is basically: (1) doesn't include maladministration, which they considered in the Constitutional Convention and rejected. so you can't be impeached for being poo poo at your job, inefficient, or otherwise generally doing bad at running the Executive (2) was clearly written to be broad in order to encompass abuses of power that are not crimes since OBVIOUSLY the constitution was written before federal criminal law existed (this is the republicans' stupidest argument)
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2019 16:47
|
|