Democrats plan to introduce articles of impeachment as early as Monday

#1,251
#1,251
n_huffhines said:
I think they understand. The media and the national politicians entrenched in the political system thrive when there is division. I think the point is to divide. Win or lose the WH, CNN/Fox News do great when there is an opposing bogeyman. Win or lose the WH, Nancy Pelosi/Ted Cruz do great when there is an opposing bogeyman.
Click to expand...

At some point both (media and politicians) need to start thinking "accountability" when the rhetoric or reporting thereof reaches dangerous levels.

You don't continue tossing gasoline on the bonfire when it starts moving towards the storage tank. Eventually, someone needs to stop and say "maybe we're pushing too far..."
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#1,252
#1,252
Sea Ray said:
Exactly. He had a chance to be a uniter and squash this in his Inauguration speech. Instead he ignored it. He hasn't taken an official stance. He is a swampy, wimp of a politician. He will come out against it when it's Dead on Arrival anyway. It'll be like the Russians declaring war on the Japs after we'd already kicked their a$$.
Click to expand...

If they convict Trump, then prospective GOP candidates in the senate don't have to run against him next time around. Nobody in congress likes an outsider in the WH - too much a threat to their way of life. Don't count on republicans as not guilty votes.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: VolStrom
#1,253
#1,253
Grand Vol said:
At some point both (media and politicians) need to start thinking "accountability" when the rhetoric or reporting thereof reaches dangerous levels.

You don't continue tossing gasoline on the bonfire when it starts moving towards the storage tank. Eventually, someone needs to stop and say "maybe we're pushing too far..."
Click to expand...

that's where ratings come from

 
  • Like
Reactions: Orangeburst, NorthDallas40, Grand Vol and 1 other person
#1,256
#1,256
AM64 said:
If they convict Trump, then prospective GOP candidates in the senate don't have to run against him next time around. Nobody in congress likes an outsider in the WH - too much a threat to their way of life. Don't count on republicans as not guilty votes.
Click to expand...

Most Republicans in the Senate probably prefer to be rid of Trump. But most of them don't have the guts to go against him.
 
#1,257
#1,257
You have to love Rand Paul and the Senate GOP.

Rand Paul calls impeachment 'dead on arrival' after most Republicans signal that trial is unconstitutional - CNNPolitics

First, their major argument is that the trial and vote on impeachment is a waste of time. So what do Paul and the Senate GOP do? They hold a vote on whether to have a vote. LOL.

Then -- and this is classic -- Rand Paul dismisses the impeachment effort as just partisanship.... based on bragging about GOP partisanship:

"If you voted that it was unconstitutional then how in the world would you ever hope to convict somebody for this?" Paul asked, adding ,"45 of us, almost the entire caucus, 95% of the caucus, voted that the whole proceeding was unconstitutional. This is a big victory for us. Democrats can beat this partisan horse as long as they want -- this vote indicates it's over, the trial is all over."
Click to expand...

I mean, you cannot make this up!
 
#1,258
#1,258
Vol Main said:
Most Republicans in the Senate probably prefer to be rid of Trump. But they don't have the guts to go against him.
Click to expand...
I think they are foolish to go against him. They completely underestimate his popularity. It shows the scumbaggery of everyone located inside the beltway.

Trump 2024
 
  • Like
Reactions: davethevol, AM64 and Orangeburst
#1,259
#1,259
lawgator1 said:
You have to love Rand Paul and the Senate GOP.

Rand Paul calls impeachment 'dead on arrival' after most Republicans signal that trial is unconstitutional - CNNPolitics

First, their major argument is that the trial and vote on impeachment is a waste of time. So what do Paul and the Senate GOP do? They hold a vote on whether to have a vote. LOL.

Then -- and this is classic -- Rand Paul dismisses the impeachment effort as just partisanship.... based on bragging about GOP partisanship:



I mean, you cannot make this up!
Click to expand...
It IS a waste of time.

Newsflash: Trump is out of office. What are you 'impeaching'? His ability to run again??? Are you that ****ing scared of him? If you are, it would be in the left's better interest to let him run and fracture the Republican party. Ya'll a bunch of dumbasses.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hUTch2002 and AM64
#1,260
#1,260
SpaceCoastVol said:
It IS a waste of time.

Newsflash: Trump is out of office. What are you 'impeaching'? His ability to run again??? Are you that ****ing scared of him? If you are, it would be in the left's better interest to let him run and fracture the Republican party. Ya'll a bunch of dumbasses.
Click to expand...


Look, I said before I did not like impeachment and do see it as divisive. I do, however, understand the point of it, which is to formally register the condemnation of Trump and his supporters for what occurred on January 6. There is certainly merit to that, even if I might not think it overall a good idea to pursue it.
 
#1,263
#1,263
lawgator1 said:
Look, I said before I did not like impeachment and do see it as divisive. I do, however, understand the point of it, which is to formally register the condemnation of Trump and his supporters for what occurred on January 6. There is certainly merit to that, even if I might not think it overall a good idea to pursue it.
Click to expand...

So we can judge a movement over a few..Good to know
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64 and SpaceCoastVol
#1,265
#1,265
lawgator1 said:
Look, I said before I did not like impeachment and do see it as divisive. I do, however, understand the point of it, which is to formally register the condemnation of Trump and his supporters for what occurred on January 6. There is certainly merit to that, even if I might not think it overall a good idea to pursue it.
Click to expand...
Makes as much sense as this:

iu


But I thought Bribden wanted to 'heal' the country.

Guess not if he doesn't stop the disenfranchisement of 70 million + voters. He can KMA I hope he fails at everything he does. The only thing I want him to do is live long enough to get the left thrown out of power.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#1,267
#1,267
SpaceCoastVol said:
It IS a waste of time.

Newsflash: Trump is out of office. What are you 'impeaching'? His ability to run again??? Are you that ****ing scared of him? If you are, it would be in the left's better interest to let him run and fracture the Republican party. Ya'll a bunch of dumbasses.
Click to expand...

All politics aside, impeaching Trump is the right thing to do.
 
#1,269
#1,269
Seditious Conspiracy and Federal Law: The Basics
The federal law against seditious conspiracy can be found in Title 18 of the U.S. Code (which includes treason, rebellion, and similar offenses), specifically 18 U.S.C. § 2384. According to the statutory definition of sedition, it is a crime for two or more people within the jurisdiction of the United States:

  • To conspire to overthrow or destroy by force the government of the United States or to level war against them;
  • To oppose by force the authority of the United States government; to prevent, hinder, or delay by force the execution of any law of the United States; or
  • To take, seize, or possess by force any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof.
Sedition - FindLaw
 
#1,271
#1,271
Vol Main said:
Seditious Conspiracy and Federal Law: The Basics
The federal law against seditious conspiracy can be found in Title 18 of the U.S. Code (which includes treason, rebellion, and similar offenses), specifically 18 U.S.C. § 2384. According to the statutory definition of sedition, it is a crime for two or more people within the jurisdiction of the United States:

  • To conspire to overthrow or destroy by force the government of the United States or to level war against them;
  • To oppose by force the authority of the United States government; to prevent, hinder, or delay by force the execution of any law of the United States; or
  • To take, seize, or possess by force any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof.
Sedition - FindLaw
Click to expand...

What does your post have to do with anything?
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#1,274
#1,274
lawgator1 said:
Look, I said before I did not like impeachment and do see it as divisive. I do, however, understand the point of it, which is to formally register the condemnation of Trump and his supporters for what occurred on January 6. There is certainly merit to that, even if I might not think it overall a good idea to pursue it.
Click to expand...

Common sense says you don't want to pull this genie out of the bottle. It can work against one party as well as another, and the libs have a lot more troops lined up to riot, loot, pillage, burn at the drop of a hat. It's easy pickings to find an idiot dem legislator with a big mouth and evidence they urged it on. Incredibly stupid move. Same with the domestic terrorism bill that's going to get shoved up some dem legislator's back ends. Your clowns championed riotous free speech, and now you don't like what you see. You're nutcases are trying to clamp the valve down on a boiling pressure cooker; that doesn't come out well. Conciliation works better, and so does not setting something stupid loose in the first place.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top