[Second Impeachment] of the 45th President of the United States | Trial: 1pm 02/08/2021

1356736

Posts

  • ElkiElki get busy Moderator, ClubPA mod
    Chanus, I know how impeachment works. I don’t know why you’d thinks what’s going on here is a literal lack of understanding how the process works.

    smCQ5WE.jpg
    OrcaTetraNitroCubaneRingoStyrofoam SammichDee KaeAridhol
  • ChanusChanus I've seen things... Registered User regular
    HamHamJ wrote: »
    dispatch.o wrote: »
    The choices are -
    Rush impeachment to this congress, feel good about making Republicans own the fact they will defend Trump and ultimately not have anything of consequence happen.

    or

    Pace impeachment so that it falls to the next congress where despite not feeling as good there will be a resulting trial that can take as long as it needs to. Still no guarantee that you get the 2/3rds vote to remove.

    Why not both? There's no actual limit to how many times you can impeach someone. It's also crazy to say that having the GOP say sedition is also not enough for them to actually do anything would have no effect.

    because every time you do it, especially if you don't succeed, costs political capital

    Allegedly a voice of reason.
    destroyah87dispatch.oEncadytumRaiju
  • ChanusChanus I've seen things... Registered User regular
    Elki wrote: »
    Chanus, I know how impeachment works. I don’t know why you’d thinks what’s going on here is a literal lack of understanding how the process works.

    because the argument people are making is the Democrats are doing nothing for 110 days?

    Allegedly a voice of reason.
    SageinaRageshryke
  • HamHamJHamHamJ Registered User regular
    Chanus wrote: »
    HamHamJ wrote: »
    dispatch.o wrote: »
    The choices are -
    Rush impeachment to this congress, feel good about making Republicans own the fact they will defend Trump and ultimately not have anything of consequence happen.

    or

    Pace impeachment so that it falls to the next congress where despite not feeling as good there will be a resulting trial that can take as long as it needs to. Still no guarantee that you get the 2/3rds vote to remove.

    Why not both? There's no actual limit to how many times you can impeach someone. It's also crazy to say that having the GOP say sedition is also not enough for them to actually do anything would have no effect.

    because every time you do it, especially if you don't succeed, costs political capital

    Prove it. The first impeachment doesn't seem to have done any such thing.

    While racing light mechs, your Urbanmech comes in second place, but only because it ran out of ammo.
    CelestialBadgerXaquinMild ConfusionKraintRingoStyrofoam Sammichnever dieDee KaeDavid WalgasMan in the Mists
  • AiouaAioua Ora Occidens Ora OptimaRegistered User regular
    edited January 10
    I'm not convinced anything will be gained by having a Democratic controlled impeachment trial.

    The Republicans aren't going to suddenly change their tune when presented with evidence of Trump's malfeasance. They've seen that every day for four years and haven't given a shit.

    I don't think the public will get it much either, and I'm worried it will seem cravenly political to the uninformed--why are you removing a guy who's already removed?

    If you want to put Trump on trial during the new administration let's put him on actual trial for all the fucking crimes he's committed.

    Aioua on
    life's a game that you're bound to lose / like using a hammer to pound in screws
    fuck up once and you break your thumb / if you're happy at all then you're god damn dumb
    that's right we're on a fucked up cruise / God is dead but at least we have booze
    bad things happen, no one knows why / the sun burns out and everyone dies
    HamHamJBloodsheedmonikerspool32ElvenshaePolaritieStyrofoam SammichBigJoeMMr RaykimeRaiju
  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    dispatch.o wrote: »
    The choices are -
    Rush impeachment to this congress, feel good about making Republicans own the fact they will defend Trump and ultimately not have anything of consequence happen.

    or

    Pace impeachment so that it falls to the next congress where despite not feeling as good there will be a resulting trial that can take as long as it needs to. Still no guarantee that you get the 2/3rds vote to remove.

    I think the first option is what will satisfy me as swift decisive action, but the second option will be more thorough and have a result I want.

    I'll wait. I'll still be angry senate Republicans are shitty traitors to the constitution but that's not new.

    The 117th Congress was seated last Sunday. Everything that happens will happen in this Congress. You mean next Administration. The only issue there being that a Senate trial preempts literally any other Senate business. Including appointing a Cabinet.

    But you know what? Fuck it. This was an armed insurrection. If Republicans vote to acquit this then let them. Nothing about that will change, and the impact it will have on Biden is similarly unchanged. Because if they will let this stand then they aren't going to be all kumbaya about his Cabinet or emergency legislation. So make them own it and brand themselves the traitors that they are.

    MillOrcaSleepMild ConfusionTetraNitroCubaneRingoBigJoeMDavid WalgasMan in the MistsLinespider5Ardol
  • TastyfishTastyfish Registered User regular
    This definitely seems like a thing to do whilst it's still in people's minds. Waiting three months to do it is just going to have people confused about why the senate is trying to get rid of a president who's already left (which is what most people assume impeachment is about) and why they are going back to Trump rather than moving forward with more important things.

    If you're not doing it Jan 20th, or immediately after the Covid rescue package, then you might as well not do it as there will always be 'more important things to do' and the sense of outrage will have faded, the republican voters who are angry now will just see it as political point scoring (especially as 'mysteriously' only a tiny minority actually supported the coup at the time despite what polling might have revealed at the time).

    monikerOrcaSleepElendilrahkeesh2000A Kobold's KoboldshrykeTetraNitroCubaneRingoNobeardMr RayDavid WalgasMan in the MistsLinespider5Ardol
  • dispatch.odispatch.o Registered User regular
    moniker wrote: »
    dispatch.o wrote: »
    The choices are -
    Rush impeachment to this congress, feel good about making Republicans own the fact they will defend Trump and ultimately not have anything of consequence happen.

    or

    Pace impeachment so that it falls to the next congress where despite not feeling as good there will be a resulting trial that can take as long as it needs to. Still no guarantee that you get the 2/3rds vote to remove.

    I think the first option is what will satisfy me as swift decisive action, but the second option will be more thorough and have a result I want.

    I'll wait. I'll still be angry senate Republicans are shitty traitors to the constitution but that's not new.

    The 117th Congress was seated last Sunday. Everything that happens will happen in this Congress. You mean next Administration. The only issue there being that a Senate trial preempts literally any other Senate business. Including appointing a Cabinet.

    But you know what? Fuck it. This was an armed insurrection. If Republicans vote to acquit this then let them. Nothing about that will change, and the impact it will have on Biden is similarly unchanged. Because if they will let this stand then they aren't going to be all kumbaya about his Cabinet or emergency legislation. So make them own it and brand themselves the traitors that they are.

    They won't vote to acquit. They won't have to. Georgia senators and Harris aren't in the Senate for weeks. It may as well be a new congress.

    Chanusshryke
  • ChanusChanus I've seen things... Registered User regular
    HamHamJ wrote: »
    Chanus wrote: »
    HamHamJ wrote: »
    dispatch.o wrote: »
    The choices are -
    Rush impeachment to this congress, feel good about making Republicans own the fact they will defend Trump and ultimately not have anything of consequence happen.

    or

    Pace impeachment so that it falls to the next congress where despite not feeling as good there will be a resulting trial that can take as long as it needs to. Still no guarantee that you get the 2/3rds vote to remove.

    Why not both? There's no actual limit to how many times you can impeach someone. It's also crazy to say that having the GOP say sedition is also not enough for them to actually do anything would have no effect.

    because every time you do it, especially if you don't succeed, costs political capital

    Prove it. The first impeachment doesn't seem to have done any such thing.

    WASHINGTON, D.C. -- More Americans approve of the job congressional Republicans are doing than of congressional Democrats' performance -- 40% vs. 35%. The rating for Republicans in Congress has risen six percentage points since late October, before the impeachment of President Donald Trump in the U.S. House of Representatives. Over the same period, congressional Democrats' approval rating has edged down three points and disapproval has climbed five points, from 57% to 62%.

    Just as the public's assessments of congressional Republicans appear to have benefited from Trump's impeachment, so too has Trump. In January and February, the president's job approval rating rose to his personal best of 49%; it remains elevated from where it was before his impeachment. Likewise, Trump's favorability rating, which was 41% in October, reached 48% in January and is currently 46%, including 89% favorable among Republicans and Republican-leaning independents.

    https://news.gallup.com/poll/287633/approval-congressional-republicans-tops-democrats.aspx

    Allegedly a voice of reason.
    Encspool32
  • BlindPsychicBlindPsychic Registered User regular
    I don't think there's going to be much heart in a Senate trial by the time Biden is in office. He doesn't seem to be pressuring leadership to move any faster than they are now.

  • HamHamJHamHamJ Registered User regular
    And why do you need a month long trial? Just play a clip of Trump telling people to storm the capitol, play a clip of a mob storming the capitol, call for a vote.

    While racing light mechs, your Urbanmech comes in second place, but only because it ran out of ammo.
    OrcaDoctor DetroitCelestialBadgerTetraNitroCubaneRingoDreznever dieCaedwyrdiscriderMr RayTofystedethMan in the Mists
  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    dispatch.o wrote: »
    moniker wrote: »
    dispatch.o wrote: »
    The choices are -
    Rush impeachment to this congress, feel good about making Republicans own the fact they will defend Trump and ultimately not have anything of consequence happen.

    or

    Pace impeachment so that it falls to the next congress where despite not feeling as good there will be a resulting trial that can take as long as it needs to. Still no guarantee that you get the 2/3rds vote to remove.

    I think the first option is what will satisfy me as swift decisive action, but the second option will be more thorough and have a result I want.

    I'll wait. I'll still be angry senate Republicans are shitty traitors to the constitution but that's not new.

    The 117th Congress was seated last Sunday. Everything that happens will happen in this Congress. You mean next Administration. The only issue there being that a Senate trial preempts literally any other Senate business. Including appointing a Cabinet.

    But you know what? Fuck it. This was an armed insurrection. If Republicans vote to acquit this then let them. Nothing about that will change, and the impact it will have on Biden is similarly unchanged. Because if they will let this stand then they aren't going to be all kumbaya about his Cabinet or emergency legislation. So make them own it and brand themselves the traitors that they are.

    They won't vote to acquit. They won't have to. Georgia senators and Harris aren't in the Senate for weeks. It may as well be a new congress.

    It takes 2/3rds to convict, not a simple majority. The most likely outcome is that he is voted acquitted again, unless Republicans are willing to put Country and their own lives ahead of Party.

  • JavenJaven Registered User regular
    If political capital ever existed, which I’m not sure it existed past an excuse not to do something, Republicans killed it decades ago.

    OrcaBloodsheedSleepCelestialBadgerXaquinRingoStyrofoam SammichBigJoeMthatassemblyguyNiryaDee KaeSorceDavid WalgasMan in the Mists
  • DarkPrimusDarkPrimus Registered User regular
    edited January 10
    Aioua wrote: »
    I'm not convinced anything will be gained by having a Democratic controlled impeachment trial.

    The Republicans aren't going to suddenly change their tune when presented with evidence of Trump's malfeasance. They've seen that every day for four years and haven't given a shit.

    I don't think the public will get it much either, and I'm worried it will seem cravenly political to the uninformed--why are you removing a guy who's already removed?

    If you want to put Trump on trial during the new administration let's put him on actual trial for all the fucking crimes he's committed.

    We can do both, and if the Democrats stayed focused and unified on messaging they could get it through to the general public why it's important they're doing something. GOP certainly was able to get their messages across to the public consciousness even when they were built on absolute falsehoods.

    DarkPrimus on
    dt3GeqU.png
    Gamertag: PrimusD | Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
    monikerOrcaMillElvenshaeA Kobold's KoboldTetraNitroCubaneRingoMan in the MistsArdol
  • ChanusChanus I've seen things... Registered User regular
    HamHamJ wrote: »
    And why do you need a month long trial? Just play a clip of Trump telling people to storm the capitol, play a clip of a mob storming the capitol, call for a vote.

    because right now McConnell controls how long the trial takes

    Allegedly a voice of reason.
    dispatch.oSleepEncElvenshaeRaiju
  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    Chanus wrote: »
    HamHamJ wrote: »
    And why do you need a month long trial? Just play a clip of Trump telling people to storm the capitol, play a clip of a mob storming the capitol, call for a vote.

    because right now McConnell controls how long the trial takes

    A Majority of the Senate controls that. If that majority changes midtrial then so much the better.

    RingoMan in the Mists
  • ChanusChanus I've seen things... Registered User regular
    moniker wrote: »
    Chanus wrote: »
    HamHamJ wrote: »
    And why do you need a month long trial? Just play a clip of Trump telling people to storm the capitol, play a clip of a mob storming the capitol, call for a vote.

    because right now McConnell controls how long the trial takes

    A Majority of the Senate controls that. If that majority changes midtrial then so much the better.

    i'm specifically talking about people demanding this happen before Jan 20

    Allegedly a voice of reason.
    spool32Elvenshae
  • dispatch.odispatch.o Registered User regular
    edited January 10
    Then it just looks like Democrats are changing the rules because things arent going their way.

    With a majority you set the rules of the trial. Republicans can just let the clock run out after fucking it all up and dumping it in the Democrats lap. Best to let the rules be decided by the ones who will run the trial.

    dispatch.o on
  • ChanusChanus I've seen things... Registered User regular
    dispatch.o wrote: »
    Then it just looks like Democrats are changing the rules because things arent going their way.

    to be fair

    the rules are shit

    Allegedly a voice of reason.
    dispatch.oFoolOnTheHillRaijuTofystedethLinespider5
  • ChanusChanus I've seen things... Registered User regular
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    Aioua wrote: »
    I'm not convinced anything will be gained by having a Democratic controlled impeachment trial.

    The Republicans aren't going to suddenly change their tune when presented with evidence of Trump's malfeasance. They've seen that every day for four years and haven't given a shit.

    I don't think the public will get it much either, and I'm worried it will seem cravenly political to the uninformed--why are you removing a guy who's already removed?

    If you want to put Trump on trial during the new administration let's put him on actual trial for all the fucking crimes he's committed.

    We can do both, and if the Democrats stayed focused and unified on messaging they could get it through to the general public why it's important they're doing something. GOP certainly was able to get their messages across to the public consciousness even when they were built on absolute falsehoods.

    the GOP has had focused messaging for almost 60 years

    Allegedly a voice of reason.
    Sleepspool32ElvenshaeshrykeFeloniousmozMan in the Mists
  • DarkPrimusDarkPrimus Registered User regular
    dispatch.o wrote: »
    Then it just looks like Democrats are changing the rules because things arent going their way.

    *looks at the past... ten years of the GOP doing that*

    Okay, and?

    dt3GeqU.png
    Gamertag: PrimusD | Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
    monikerSleepCelestialBadgerNobodyJavenBloodsheedA Kobold's KoboldAbsoluteZeroTetraNitroCubaneRingoBigJoeMDee KaeRaijuMan in the MistsLinespider5Ardol
  • JavenJaven Registered User regular
    dispatch.o wrote: »
    Then it just looks like Democrats are changing the rules because things arent going their way.

    So?

    People speak at length on this forum about how unfair the rules are for Democrats, and how they only reason why they aren't sweeping every election and able to bestow a progressive paradise upon us all is because of the rules that allow for filibustering, gerrymandering, etc.

    Changing the rules is a good thing

    ChanusSleepBloodsheedAbsoluteZeroMan in the Mists
  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    Chanus wrote: »
    moniker wrote: »
    Chanus wrote: »
    HamHamJ wrote: »
    And why do you need a month long trial? Just play a clip of Trump telling people to storm the capitol, play a clip of a mob storming the capitol, call for a vote.

    because right now McConnell controls how long the trial takes

    A Majority of the Senate controls that. If that majority changes midtrial then so much the better.

    i'm specifically talking about people demanding this happen before Jan 20

    The House votes for impeachment tomorrow or Tuesday depending on parliamentary procedures. Alert the Senate immediately after and they start the trial before the inauguration. If McConnell does manage to try and delay it then Georgia gets Seated and things change anyway with the blood on his hands.

    OrcaDoodmannRingodiscriderRaiju
  • HamHamJHamHamJ Registered User regular
    Chanus wrote: »
    HamHamJ wrote: »
    And why do you need a month long trial? Just play a clip of Trump telling people to storm the capitol, play a clip of a mob storming the capitol, call for a vote.

    because right now McConnell controls how long the trial takes

    Okay? He doesn't have a month. If anything he will also force a quick vote. Or I guess be forced to not doing anything else in the remainder of the lame duck? Which would be a concrete gain honestly.

    Impeach now. If McConnell holds the vote immediately and acquits again, impeach again once the new Senate is sworn in. Convict on a 50/50 party line vote if you have to. Slam the GOP with choosing Party over Country for the next couple elections.

    While racing light mechs, your Urbanmech comes in second place, but only because it ran out of ammo.
    OrcaJavenMan in the Mists
  • MillMill Registered User regular
    Democrats don't need to push this out for three months later. I suspect McConnell is trying to gaslight people because it's becoming apparent this is lose/lose for shitbag fascists like him, once impeachment is initiated. The modern GOP leadership has concluded they need the shitwad fascist vote to win election, but at the same time just about everyone else is fucking pissed about what happened. If they vote to not punish Trump, the run a real risk of people punishing them going forward. If the vote to remove Trump's ass, as they fucking should because they took an oath, the fascists will stop voting for them.

    Of course, the GOP is run by stupid fucks because anyone with a decent number of braincells would realize the fascists filth wants Trump and his brand of shit that turns many voters off. Once he is off the ballot, a fair number of those fuckers are going to vote republican. If they manage to appeal to them, a ton of non-fascists will turn out and say "Fuck, no!" So really the smart play, the ethical play and patriotic play is to keep Trump's fucking ass, but the modern GOP is full of fucking idiots.

    Also it's fairly easy to argue for the Senate to vote to remove once the vote clears the House. I mean again, at this point, you either believe the events on the 6th were treason, or you're a piece of shit that either doesn't believe that was treason or is willing to enable treason for the sake of power. This also goes for the voting base. If someone tries the shit of "but they acted too fast," that was someone approves treason that is being dishonest about why the objected to the vote.

    OrcaDoodmannjdarksunMan in the Mists
  • EncEnc A Fool with Compassion Pronouns: He, Him, HisRegistered User regular
    • This should happen faster if it is going to be meaningful
    • This can't happen faster due to how the process works, because of McConnell blocking it for the GOP, if it is going to be meaningful (re: keeping Trump from office)
    • Democrats will have a hard time getting the needed GOP support in the senate to vote on this multiple times, because they have to gamble between the GOP votebloc and how much on the level of horror at what happened vs loyal to the pundit bloc they are. Conviction can't happen without GOP support due to the numbers.
    • The longer it takes the more likely it galvanizes Republicans' support behind Trump when it does happen, making it even less likely that the GOP will help.

    All of these things are true. We can argue sooner or later with both having merits, but really there isn't a way to really impeach and convict effectively under any timeline due to how tenuous the control of the senate is. That they are voting to start it anyway is good and necessary, but everyone should prepare themselves for the most likely outcome that there isn't a goldilocks zone here for getting this done.

    Chanus
  • JavenJaven Registered User regular
    The only way it makes sense imo is from a perspective of 'we don't want to piss off Republicans by forcing a vote because then they may seek retribution by trying to obstruct Biden's agenda' which they're going to do anyway please don't think they will ever work with you on anything ever

    OrcaSleepCelestialBadgerBloodsheedDarkPrimusRingoKipling217BigJoeMthatassemblyguyjdarksunNiryaDee KaeAridholMr RayFeloniousmozRaijuSorcemiscellaneousinsanityMan in the MistsLinespider5
  • Inkstain82Inkstain82 Registered User regular
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    dispatch.o wrote: »
    Then it just looks like Democrats are changing the rules because things arent going their way.

    *looks at the past... ten years of the GOP doing that*

    Okay, and?

    And they seem to be losing a lot of elections

  • ChanusChanus I've seen things... Registered User regular
    moniker wrote: »
    Chanus wrote: »
    moniker wrote: »
    Chanus wrote: »
    HamHamJ wrote: »
    And why do you need a month long trial? Just play a clip of Trump telling people to storm the capitol, play a clip of a mob storming the capitol, call for a vote.

    because right now McConnell controls how long the trial takes

    A Majority of the Senate controls that. If that majority changes midtrial then so much the better.

    i'm specifically talking about people demanding this happen before Jan 20

    The House votes for impeachment tomorrow or Tuesday depending on parliamentary procedures. Alert the Senate immediately after and they start the trial before the inauguration. If McConnell does manage to try and delay it then Georgia gets Seated and things change anyway with the blood on his hands.

    i'm not 100% convinced, but i can see merit in the idea that nothing can be done before Trump leaves office through normal means anyway, getting to the business of actually governing once Biden is sworn in is more important than an act that will do very little other than score a few political points against some Republicans

    we still need things like actual COVID relief and an extension of unemployment benefits. does the person about to lose their house really care when in the next three months Democrats try and fail to do anything meaningful to Trump?

    at the same time, DoJ has put incitement charges back on the table. DC DA has announced today they are seeking to file incitement charges against any politician they can show is responsible

    a lot could happen in the next month that changes the outcome of this for the better. i am not sure rushing to just do something that will likely be ineffective is the correct move

    Allegedly a voice of reason.
  • Inkstain82Inkstain82 Registered User regular
    HamHamJ wrote: »
    Chanus wrote: »
    HamHamJ wrote: »
    And why do you need a month long trial? Just play a clip of Trump telling people to storm the capitol, play a clip of a mob storming the capitol, call for a vote.

    because right now McConnell controls how long the trial takes

    Okay? He doesn't have a month. If anything he will also force a quick vote. Or I guess be forced to not doing anything else in the remainder of the lame duck? Which would be a concrete gain honestly.

    Impeach now. If McConnell holds the vote immediately and acquits again, impeach again once the new Senate is sworn in. Convict on a 50/50 party line vote if you have to. Slam the GOP with choosing Party over Country for the next couple elections.

    A 50-50 vote is an acquittal. You still need 17 republican votes to convict

    Encdispatch.odestroyah87ChanusmonikerSmrtnikdurandal4532ElvenshaeA Kobold's KoboldStabbity StyleshrykeJaysonFourNobeardRaijuSorce
  • dispatch.odispatch.o Registered User regular
    edited January 10
    HamHamJ wrote: »
    Chanus wrote: »
    HamHamJ wrote: »
    And why do you need a month long trial? Just play a clip of Trump telling people to storm the capitol, play a clip of a mob storming the capitol, call for a vote.

    because right now McConnell controls how long the trial takes

    Okay? He doesn't have a month. If anything he will also force a quick vote. Or I guess be forced to not doing anything else in the remainder of the lame duck? Which would be a concrete gain honestly.

    Impeach now. If McConnell holds the vote immediately and acquits again, impeach again once the new Senate is sworn in. Convict on a 50/50 party line vote if you have to. Slam the GOP with choosing Party over Country for the next couple elections.

    50/50 doesn't work. It's 2/3rds.

    Which leaves plenty of cover for 'very concerned' Republicans to vote yes and still fail.

    Democrats need to decide the rules for the trial if there's any chance.

    Edit: So I'm clear. Waiting 100 days is fucking madness. I'm saying wait 10 days and lock that shit in with Harris as 51.

    dispatch.o on
    ChanusRaiju
  • spool32spool32 Contrary Library Registered User regular
    Inkstain82 wrote: »
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    dispatch.o wrote: »
    Then it just looks like Democrats are changing the rules because things arent going their way.

    *looks at the past... ten years of the GOP doing that*

    Okay, and?

    And they seem to be losing a lot of elections

    That's not accurate - they gained seats in the House and nearly held the Senate too. They outperformed everywhere. Pelosi's majority is thin as fuck right now and it's very, very possible she loses it in 2022, depending on how apportionment goes after the 2020 census.

    ChanusExtreaminatusEncdispatch.omonikerBloodsheedElvenshaeSleepA Kobold's KoboldDarkPrimusshrykeTetraNitroCubaneadejaanRingonever dieBigJoeMthatassemblyguyFoolOnTheHillNobeardMr RayRaijuSorceDavid WalgasTofystedethCantide
  • rahkeesh2000rahkeesh2000 Registered User regular
    I don't know that a Senate trial in the first Biden days gets a conviction but it sure as shit ain't happening months later. That suggestion is just a way for dems to back down.

    spool32OrcaCelestialBadgerdispatch.oBloodsheedRingonever dieBigJoeMthatassemblyguyRaijuMan in the Mists
  • ChanusChanus I've seen things... Registered User regular
    spool32 wrote: »
    Inkstain82 wrote: »
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    dispatch.o wrote: »
    Then it just looks like Democrats are changing the rules because things arent going their way.

    *looks at the past... ten years of the GOP doing that*

    Okay, and?

    And they seem to be losing a lot of elections

    That's not accurate - they gained seats in the House and nearly held the Senate too. They outperformed everywhere. Pelosi's majority is thin as fuck right now and it's very, very possible she loses it in 2022, depending on how apportionment goes after the 2020 census.

    i can guarantee repeatedly impeaching Trump after he's out of office is the quickest path to a red wave in 2022

    Allegedly a voice of reason.
    spool32Doodmanndispatch.oHahnsoo1EncElvenshaeSleepA Kobold's KoboldGilgaronthatassemblyguyMr RayCantideEinzel
  • ChanusChanus I've seen things... Registered User regular
    edited January 10
    I don't know that a Senate trial in the first Biden days gets a conviction but it sure as shit ain't happening months later. That suggestion is just a way for dems to back down.

    once the House sets the date for the Senate trial this week, no matter when that date is, that date has to happen

    there is no backing down

    Chanus on
    Allegedly a voice of reason.
    CelestialBadgerEnc
  • MillMill Registered User regular
    A vote denies the GOP the bullshit game they are angling to play. They want to be both on the side of "this was fucking unacceptable!" and "see we have the backs of the right!" A vote forces them to pick a side and deal with the consequences.

    I think we do get this over a 50/50 split. Romney voted to bounce Trump's ass in the first impeachment and I don't see him not doing so this time around. We could probably also get Murkowski because Alaska has ranked voting and she has no need for the GOP at this point. Toomey is another possible one, he has stated this is impeachable and given that he is retiring at the end of his current term in 2022, he has few fucks to give about making Trump's base happy. So even if we don't get removal, we probably get a big enough majority that it makes everyone who sided with Trump, look like shit. Hell, that might be enough of cudgel to get the votes needed to bounce Trump's ass out.

    OrcaCelestialBadgerMan in the Mists
  • Inkstain82Inkstain82 Registered User regular
    edited January 10
    spool32 wrote: »
    Inkstain82 wrote: »
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    dispatch.o wrote: »
    Then it just looks like Democrats are changing the rules because things arent going their way.

    *looks at the past... ten years of the GOP doing that*

    Okay, and?

    And they seem to be losing a lot of elections

    That's not accurate - they gained seats in the House and nearly held the Senate too. They outperformed everywhere. Pelosi's majority is thin as fuck right now and it's very, very possible she loses it in 2022, depending on how apportionment goes after the 2020 census.

    It’s extremely accurate. They lost more house elections than they won. They lost control of the senate. And they lost the presidency.


    There is a portion of the internet left, for whatever reason, that is obsessed with pretending wins are actually losses because they weren’t literally the best possible option.

    Inkstain82 on
  • ElkiElki get busy Moderator, ClubPA mod
    I made some some quick calls to my reps, but otherwise (not referring to this thread) I’m gonna checkout of this whole impeachment thing entirely. If they treat it some two bit issue they can look out later fine, but then I should probably do the same.

    smCQ5WE.jpg
  • monikermoniker Registered User regular
    Let me sum up my thoughts this way. Senate rules for the trial are set by the Senate, not McConnell. If he can command 100% of his dwindling majority to withstand that vote, including Romney and Murkowski, then Trump will be acquitted and the trial is a matter of counting traitors so it doesn't matter if he delays it. If McConnell cannot control 100% of his caucus, meaning Romney and Murkowski join Democrats to call for a real trial, then McConnell is effectively minority leader anyway and it doesn't matter having to wait for Georgia. Both realities merit calling for the trial as immediately as possible.

    DoodmannMillXaquinDark_SideDreznever dieBigJoeMthatassemblyguyjdarksunElJeffeMr RayFeloniousmozRaijuMan in the MistsArdol
  • spool32spool32 Contrary Library Registered User regular
    Inkstain82 wrote: »
    spool32 wrote: »
    Inkstain82 wrote: »
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    dispatch.o wrote: »
    Then it just looks like Democrats are changing the rules because things arent going their way.

    *looks at the past... ten years of the GOP doing that*

    Okay, and?

    And they seem to be losing a lot of elections

    That's not accurate - they gained seats in the House and nearly held the Senate too. They outperformed everywhere. Pelosi's majority is thin as fuck right now and it's very, very possible she loses it in 2022, depending on how apportionment goes after the 2020 census.

    It’s extremely accurate. They lost more house elections than they won. They lost control of the senate. And they lost the presidency.


    There is a portion of the internet left, for whatever reason, that is obsessed with pretending wins are actually losses because they weren’t literally the best possible option.

    The bolded is a silly thing to say. They gained seats in the House, that's the salient point electorally.

    IlpalaXaquinDarkPrimusshrykeElvenshaeDevoutlyApatheticNobeard
Sign In or Register to comment.