|
Random Stranger posted:Call witnesses, but include Bidens and staffers who outside of the conspiracy who could sit there and say, "I didn't see anything!" and anybody else they could get to muddy the waters. Basically, the ideal republican strategy at the start was "flush this turd as fast as possible" but as it became clear that there were people with major evidence then they needed to stir poo poo up as much as possible. Yeah, everyone here would have groaned at every conspiracy mongering question, but they could have used impeachment as a stage to play for their base. Something that would let your insane relatives talk about how unfair democrats were being because didn't you hear what they said in that five second sound bite on Fox news. Instead, the GOP has fumbled the ball pretty badly first by giving democrats a platform to pound "Republicans are totally corrupt!" into the national consciousness and then backing that up with their own actions. Pretty much this. The GOP should have called witnesses and then muddied the waters then. It would have given them at least some cover. Instead they ran from any sort of inkling that it was a real trial and then come out and say "Yeah, he did it but who cares?" It is absolutely the worst possible optics and a massive miscalculation on their part. Personally I'd avoid a second impeachment. It makes little sense to try it again when the Democrats had probably the best possible outcome and it will be spun and come back to hurt them in the end. It is better to take the win and then take a bigger win in the Fall.
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 20:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 10:13 |
|
|
I'd rather the senate do nothing than censure. It's such a cop out nothing gesture.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 20:25
|
|
|
The Pussy Boss posted:The only "crimes" that were highlighted by this process were obscure foreign policy horse-trading stuff that most people don't really care about. Yeah, many Americans want Trump impeached, I know I do, but for a hundred other things more important than the Ukraine stuff. People are angry at Trump, but not because he considered withholding military aid from Ukraine. They're angry because they can't afford to go the hospital or send their kids to college, and Nazis are marching in the streets. this of course discounts the negative modifier of being a fox news watcher, if they're one of those people they're never going to listen to begin with, but there are absolutely people I speak to who despite not paying attention to politics, could see how flagrantly corrupt the senate trial was. I can only hope that gets results in november.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 20:26
|
|
|
Popete posted:I'd rather the senate do nothing than censure. It's such a cop out nothing gesture. More of a nothing gesture than Actual Nothing? What?
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 20:30
|
|
|
Popete posted:I'd rather the senate do nothing than censure. It's such a cop out nothing gesture. I'd love for them to censure just so Trump goes off the handle at them
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 20:31
|
|
|
I've never heard of Second Corinthians. I've heard of Two Corinthians though.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 20:33
|
|
|
Tatsuta Age posted:More of a nothing gesture than Actual Nothing? What? Cause it gives Republicans something to point at and say "See we did something!" instead of what they're actually doing which is a blatant sham.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 20:33
|
|
|
EDIT: Wrong thread
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 20:38
|
|
|
Suppose, with adequate support from the electorate, the House Dems passed a new impeachment resolution every working day from now until the next Senate is sworn in? DDoS the senate, effectively. There's certainly plenty of impeachable material between now and then. Not 'hey, let's try this again and see if it sticks' (we all know it won't), but more a 'fine then, you croneys will be tied up in impeachment proceedings for the rest of your public careers.' I don't expect it to go this way, and I can definitely imagine messaging and false narratives that the GOP would use... but I can also imagine it being a useful tactic. The Senate just committed a serious dereliction of duty; hound them as 'illegitimate' until they're replaced. Make the official party position that they're not gunning for removal, but to ensure /every/ reason Trump /should/ be removed is all entered into the record, and forcing every senator to look at each of those reasons square in the face. The Senate has a habit of treating the House like they're a bunch of kids; it's time to completely flip that. The House should be lecturing the Senate for being idiot children, incapable of governance. I'm not advocating for the DDoS approach, merely entertaining it - but it would be a different strategy from 'let's find the one crime that senate republicans totally /would/ impeach for and try (and fail) once more.'
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 20:47
|
|
|
It's an idea, but you'd almost certainly get enough Senators to vote for summary dismissal and not tie them up that much. It would play into the "Do Nothing Democrats" story too, unless you could somehow tie the 400 bills that died in the Senate to them
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 20:50
|
|
|
Schiff is clearly swinging for the fences here. Or at least anyone remotely sitting on them. Came just shy of mentioning Rubio by name. Edit: And that's it. Schiff getting the last word before adjournment.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 21:00
|
|
|
F_Shit_Fitzgerald posted:Energizing the Democratic base and giving the American people another reason to kick Trump out of office in November. I'm not as convinced as a lot of others that impeachment will fade from voters' minds as we get closer to the election. Impeachment is a big event that doesn't come around that often, and the GOP didn't have its chance to spin the Ukraine scandal as they did with Mueller. "The GOP put party over country" is an easy talking point the Democrats can hammer and hammer the same way "her emails" was hammered in 2016. This might [will] be an unpopular opinion, M. F_Shit_Fitzgerald, but I don't think the Democrats (base or otherwise) have anything to offer the country. They don't seem to stand for anything outside of opposing Trump. Remember when Democrats wanted to strengthen the border and eliminate NAFTA? That wasn't so long ago. I don't trust either party any longer. They are fraudulent. Independents will have more of an effect on elections and national policy, but the duopoly is baked in and will take some time to conquer. I still think the anti-Trump Democratic spasm wasted a lot of time that could have been better spent on health care, education, wealth/income disparity, and the horrible military actions the U.S. has taken since 1990. But I also think that the concept of UBI should be massively embraced by Democrats, as it was in the 1970's. LOVE, VITALIS
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 21:01
|
|
|
DarkHorse posted:It's an idea, but you'd almost certainly get enough Senators to vote for summary dismissal and not tie them up that much. It would play into the "Do Nothing Democrats" story too, unless you could somehow tie the 400 bills that died in the Senate to them Honestly, it would make more sense to just keep resending all of the 400 bills to the Senate every day. Play up that the Senate is do nothing; they won't vote on bills, they can't even be bothered to hold a real trial for the President. That is a winning strategy.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 21:01
|
|
|
Vitalis Jackson posted:This might [will] be an unpopular opinion, M. F_Shit_Fitzgerald, but I don't think the Democrats (base or otherwise) have anything to offer the country. They don't seem to stand for anything outside of opposing Trump. Bernie Sanders, well known for not having strong opinions on anything except Donald Trump. Troll somewhere else, idiot.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 21:02
|
|
|
Iamgoofball posted:it was, yes, but defending rask's boomer energy posting about how these new fangled protests just aren't good enough is a bad look A protest where people just march isn't even remotely the same as a strike or sit-in, because those things actually either have an impact on the institutions that are oppressing them or are violating norms/laws that are oppressing people. Marches, unless accompanied by some sort of actual direct action, are more similar to posting on the internet than strikes. edit: To be clear, I would argue that posting on the internet is not worthless and that there's actual value to having large numbers of people express an opinion (either online or in marches, etc). But it still isn't the same as actions that directly affect the institutions/people doing the oppressing.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 21:03
|
|
|
Censure would be a tight vote and if successful could be used as a bludgeon in fall campaign advertising again ALL House Rs and any Senators who voted against. Having it on the Senate record that these were officially inappropriate or illegal acts is meaningful. It shreds the "Impeachment was a Dem Sham" argument. Clinton fessed up to the inappropriate nature of his witness tampering and perjury after trial. Trump won't, and history would benefit from this procedural footnote that officially lays it on him.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 21:04
|
|
|
twice burned ice posted:Bernie Sanders, well known for not having strong opinions on anything except Donald Trump. Troll somewhere else, idiot. I feel I should remind you that Bernie Sanders is an independent . . . LOVE, VITALIS
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 21:13
|
|
|
What is the written punishment for senators refusing to do their duties? Like, does dereliction of senate duty result in senators being impeached or recalled or anything? Because while it's obvious the senate isn't going to do anything they're supposed to do wrt holding trump accountable, are they not subject to similar oversight by anyone else? In theory, can we just be like, "okay, so you're not going to do your duty and impeach trump, so for your obvious dereliction of duty we're now placing you on trial"? I mean, I get that wouldn't happen, but does that exist? I want to know just how slash and burn we need to be when we tear up the current rules and makes ones that aren't so patently toothless.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 21:20
|
|
|
Vitalis Jackson posted:Independents will have more of an effect on elections and national policy, but the duopoly is baked in and will take some time to conquer. The duopoly is a consequence of our political system, not just a cause. It's here to stay until we make serious changes to the way our power and voting systems are structured, which will require a united push by at least one of the two big parties (which, in turn, would require a serious grassroots in-party coup). In the meantime, "independents" will continue to be a mix of single-issue voters, partisans embarrassed by the only party they seriously vote for, and people willing to throw away their votes shouting into the void. It sucks, but that's what we're stuck with. In the end, impeachment on Ukraine got us sound bytes to attack several Senators, and not impeaching would have been a disaster. The charges were clear, and we now have Republicans on record either saying that Trump's actions were a-okay, or that they weren't but they're not going to do anything about it. That's about the best we could expect. Stickman fucked around with this message at 21:27 on Feb 3, 2020 |
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 21:23
|
|
|
Vitalis Jackson posted:I feel I should remind you that Bernie Sanders is an independent . . . oh, you're one of those people
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 21:26
|
|
|
Stickman posted:The duopoly is a consequence of our political system, not just a cause. It's here to stay until we make serious changes to the way our power structure, which will require a united push by at least one of the two big parties (which, in turn, would require a serious grassroots in-party coup). In the meantime, "independents" will continue to be a mix of single-issue voters, partisans embarrassed by the only party they seriously vote for, and people willing to throw away their votes shouting into the void. Tbf, I think that when Bernie wins, there’s definitely going to be momentum for fixing the power structure.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 21:27
|
|
|
Grassley currently mumbling his way through a grand show of incredulity about the very idea of evaluating intent as a factor in evaluating conduct.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 21:30
|
|
|
it's insultingly stupid to go into a room that is over half lawyers and try to tell them that intent is not criminally relevant. I still can't believe that of all the possible ways they could try to disingenuously defend him that they went with that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 21:32
|
|
|
SubG posted:Grassley currently mumbling his way through a grand show of incredulity about the very idea of evaluating intent as a factor in evaluating conduct. I mean come on, have you ever even SEEN intent? Are we supposed to believe some invisible magic thing makes people guilty of a crime?!? Preposterous!
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 21:33
|
|
|
Did any of them do the direct 'intent relevant to crime = THOUGHT POLICE' comparison yet?
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 21:36
|
|
|
SubG posted:Grassley currently mumbling his way through a grand show of incredulity about the very idea of evaluating intent as a factor in evaluating conduct. Intent is good for "you know what"?
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 21:36
|
|
|
Munkeymon posted:Intent is good for "you know what"?
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 21:41
|
|
|
No, wait. Distinguishing murder and manslaughter.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 21:44
|
|
|
You can't know what's in a man's heart, no matter how corruptly he acts
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 21:49
|
|
|
Not a Children posted:You can't know what's in a man's heart, no matter how corruptly he acts "Who knows what evil lurks in the heart of man?
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 21:51
|
|
|
Herstory Begins Now posted:it's insultingly stupid to go into a room that is over half lawyers and try to tell them that intent is not criminally relevant. I still can't believe that of all the possible ways they could try to disingenuously defend him that they went with that. I wonder how much of this is (perhaps unconsciously) from an awareness that their words at this point are utterly meaningless. They could go up in front of the Senate and do fifteen minutes of armpit farts and it would be just as cogent a defense and have just as much effect on the verdict.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 21:51
|
|
|
Interesting that so few Senators have used the time to make a statement. Guess they figure they're get more screen time in front of cameras in the rotunda or whatever as opposed to speaking from the well.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 22:26
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/AaronBlake/status/1224447070397820936?s=19 https://twitter.com/AaronBlake/status/1224447853147246596 manchin does a thing.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 22:45
|
|
|
I really wish we had more firebrand senators on the democratic side. If I had this seat I would be railing against the republican party as hard as I could.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 22:46
|
|
|
Blackburn accusing the Democrats in the House of intentionally mismanaging the impeachment process to rig the 2020 election. Claims that Schiff just made up the conversation just to see if it would confuse everybody. Briefly does an as-a-mother-I bit, says she wouldn't stand for it if Schiff was her kid. Questions whether the whisleblower is a person, suggest that the whistleblower complaint might have written by a group, suggests Schiff and his staffers might be covering something up. Calls the requests for witnesses an attempt at a `do over'.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 22:51
|
|
|
SubG posted:Blackburn accusing the Democrats in the House of intentionally mismanaging the impeachment process to rig the 2020 election. Claims that Schiff just made up the conversation just to see if it would confuse everybody. Briefly does an as-a-mother-I bit, says she wouldn't stand for it if Schiff was her kid. Questions whether the whisleblower is a person, suggest that the whistleblower complaint might have written by a group, suggests Schiff and his staffers might be covering something up. Calls the requests for witnesses an attempt at a `do over'. is she just dumb as gently caress or is she just an empty rear end in a top hat who is ideological parasite?
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 22:53
|
|
|
Dapper_Swindler posted:is she just dumb as gently caress or is she just an empty rear end in a top hat who is ideological parasite? Why not both?
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 22:54
|
|
|
Dapper_Swindler posted:https://twitter.com/AaronBlake/status/1224447070397820936?s=19 Manchin is just trying to avoid having to vote on impeachment himself, or giving himself cover to vote against it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 22:56
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:It's a lot like impeachment really. Completely symbolic, it will motivate people hopefully to vote, will be recorded in history as a key event, but ultimately changed nothing. Lmao. "This is a symbolic event that history will record as a catalyst for sweeping change and therefore it changed nothing." The nihilists in this thread are really grasping at straws to be condescendingly above it all.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 22:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 10:13 |
|
|
FizFashizzle posted:Manchin is just trying to avoid having to vote on impeachment himself, or giving himself cover to vote against it. very true. but its would be a fun vote. Angry_Ed posted:Why not both? i walked into that one.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2020 23:03
|
|