‘It’s open season on the president’: Anonymous op-ed unleashes fresh West Wing meltdown

#677
#677
RockyTop85 said:
Doesn’t answer my question. Is that what he said, or not?
Click to expand...
Sure it did. I showed your question was irrelevant. But I can see the draw for you this is a parsing game.

Alexander voted to acquit therefore in his opinion the articles were not proven. That outcome is clear in his vote on the matter. The rest is just “but if we parse his words and ignore his vote we can make some kind of shade statement”

Carry on.
 
#678
#678
There it is:

“I believe that the Constitution provides that the people should make that decision in the presidential election that begins in Iowa on Monday.”
-Lamar Alexander

Seems silly to argue over this, now. We should know the answer by December 4 at the latest.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Orange_Crush and BowlBrother85
#680
#680
RockyTop85 said:
There it is:

“I believe that the Constitution provides that the people should make that decision in the presidential election that begins in Iowa on Monday.”
-Lamar Alexander

Seems silly to argue over this, now. We should know the answer by December 4 at the latest.
Click to expand...
What a stupid thing to say by Alexander. But based on the rest of the tortured logic in his statement on why he voted to acquit I shouldn’t be surprised.
 
#682
#682
RockyTop85 said:
The people who voted not to remove are stupid. I agree.
Click to expand...
Actually it looks like Alexander is stupid.

I think they proved their case but it’s an election year so I’ll defer to the people. He should have abstained from voting. He voted to acquit.

He was clearly pandering and BB and apparently you also bought it hook line and sinker. Not shocking I guess.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ajvol01
#683
#683
RockyTop85 said:
There it is:

“I believe that the Constitution provides that the people should make that decision in the presidential election that begins in Iowa on Monday.”
-Lamar Alexander

Seems silly to argue over this, now. We should know the answer by December 4 at the latest.
Click to expand...
True. It bothers me when I see the Trump minions act as if the Senate trial exonerated Trump. It did anything but that.
 
#685
#685
BowlBrother85 said:
True. It bothers me when I see the Trump minions act as if the Senate trial exonerated Trump. It did anything but that.
Click to expand...

Lol, you bunch of communists would tried him every year on any flake, flimsy rumor. That's what marxists do. It bothers when you communists vote for pols that go directly against the constitution.
 
#686
#686
NorthDallas40 said:
Actually it looks like Alexander is stupid.

I think they proved their case but it’s an election year so I’ll defer to the people. He should have abstained from voting. He voted to acquit.

He was clearly pandering and BB and apparently you also bought it hook line and sinker. Not shocking I guess.
Click to expand...
1. Alexander is retiring and had announced he was retiring before he made the comment. Who exactly would he be pandering to? Why?

2. Alexander wasn’t the only one who used that justification for not voting to remove. Pretty sure Rubio and others said pretty much the same thing.

It’s still stupid to argue about. They punted to the election. The election is in 5 days. We’ll know the results within a month.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Orange_Crush and BowlBrother85
#690
#690
BowlBrother85 said:
True. It bothers me when I see the Trump minions act as if the Senate trial exonerated Trump. It did anything but that.
Click to expand...

You got an affirming post from a "Biden Minion" and you think you are proven right..."all together now VN...Bless your heart".
 
#691
#691
RockyTop85 said:
1. Alexander is retiring and had announced he was retiring before he made the comment. Who exactly would he be pandering to? Why?

2. Alexander wasn’t the only one who used that justification for not voting to remove. Pretty sure Rubio and others said pretty much the same thing.

It’s still stupid to argue about. They punted to the election. The election is in 5 days. We’ll know the results within a month.
Click to expand...
1. I don’t know who he was pandering to but if he voted one way while offering statements the other way he’s pandering, being disingenuous, lying what ever take your pick.

2. More irrelevant background noise. Their vote is their opinion on the matter of were the articles proven and warranting passing the bar.

Do you like better that the articles were proven yet they never met any bar for removal? So isn’t that the definition of a waste of taxpayer resources? Great look for the House! 😂
 
#698
#698
OHvol40 said:
So if there is nothing to it, why not prove it by hearing from witnesses to determine credibility (or lack thereof)?
Click to expand...
Why not dig all that stuff up when the House made its "inquiry"? I mean, aren't you supposed to have a solid case before you bring it to trial? You don't go forward with stuff you can't prove, and when what you do have, can't even make it an impeachable offense, do you still go forward "hoping for the best?" I guess everyone must have been in a hurry or something?

If it is serious enough for impeachment, it damn well better be serious enough to have the facts in hand before proceeding, not a bunch of "we need to interview more witnesses."
 
#699
#699
BowlBrother85 said:
No. That was not the reason that Sen. Lamar Alexander provided in his Twitter statement for voting to acquit. Sen. Lamar Alexander specifically stated that the Democratic Party House managers had proven their case. Sen. Alexander gave that as the reason for why no new witnesses should be called. No new witnesses were needed because the Democrats had already proven their case "with a mountain of evidence." Sen. Alexander explained that he voted to acquit because he didn't believe that Trump's misconduct rose to the level of being an impeachable offense or justified his removal from office. Those were his words; not mine. And he didn't leave any room for any misinterpretation.
Click to expand...
What's the key take away here? Not an impeachable offense. The Democrats kept changing the charges based upon what they were not finding, not on what they found until they moved forward with weak, BS charges that showed them for what they were, a move to remove a legally elected President by any legal means possible because they don't like him, didn't before he was elected and even more so after.

#resist
 
  • Like
Reactions: NorthDallas40
#700
#700
RockyTop85 said:
There it is:

“I believe that the Constitution provides that the people should make that decision in the presidential election that begins in Iowa on Monday.”
-Lamar Alexander

Seems silly to argue over this, now. We should know the answer by December 4 at the latest.
Click to expand...
We hopefully will know one way or the other before then.

This year has been crazy though, so who knows, maybe by January 20, 2021?
 
  • Like
Reactions: NorthDallas40
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top