• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Impeachment: The Sequel

DCDeac said:
Eh, I feel like that's giving people too much credit.

I think there's simply a number of pubs that are scared of Trump directly (based on stories from Trump National this is almost certainly the case for Lindsey Graham and a few others) or scared of his followers, either physically or in the voting booth. That number is past the tipping point and enables an illusion of solidarity, and they'll find a way to blame the process or the timing even if they despise Trump and everything he stands for. Solidarity removes individual accountability.

Or in other words, they're generally a bunch of pussies. 2024 Trump might be scary but it's not scary enough. Just like apparently the capital raid was scary but since no Republican Senators actually got shot or beaten it wasn't scary enough.
Click to expand...

Like they'd give a shit if some three percentage kneecapped Jon Tester.
 
Show time tomorrow.

Come on pubs.... uphold your oaths and convict the SOB.
 
BarcaDeac said:
He could get up there and detail elaborate plans of how he planned the entire thing and explicitly ordered the executions of Pence, Pelosi, Romney and Schumer and he would still be acquitted with the justification given he’s no longer in office.
Click to expand...

That was actually the talking point used by pretty much every Republican on the Sunday morning news shows yesterday, from GOP Senators to Chris Christie. Christie at least said that Trump should have been impeached by the House, but then said that as a former prosecutor he had some "concerns" about the constitutionality of removing someone who was already out of office. The GOP Senators just kept sidestepping the question of Trump's guilt by saying that convicting someone already out of office was unconstitutional. I'm sure that will be the final justification for nearly all of them in voting against conviction. With a few exceptions, they're just spineless, the lot of them.

What's even better is that a number of these guys - Cruz, Hawley, Cotton, Graham, Rand Paul - have serious presidential ambitions, and voting to convict Trump would actually help them in their goal to win the GOP nomination. And yet they'll all vote against it anyway, in hopes of pleasing Trump's base. If Trump does run in '24 and beats them yet again, one wonders what will be going through the minds of some of these toads. Instead of running for POTUS themselves, they may spend a good chunk of their political careers licking Trump's boots and doing his bidding like errand boys.
 
Apparently there is "new" evidence that has not been seen before. Prepare to be underwhelmed. Only Democrats would prepare you for new evidence, rather than just bringing it up without warning.
 
morrison2951 said:
Show time tomorrow.

Come on pubs.... uphold your oaths and convict the SOB.
Click to expand...


I’m afraid it’s likely fantasy to imagine more than a tiny number of them growing a spine or caring about honesty, decency, truth, or actually what is good or important.
 
McConnell will show what a duplicitous, spineless coward he is by talking shit and still not voting to convict.
 
It's a video, at least that's the new evidence I heard about. If it's just more police fighting with angry white people, I don't think it will matter much. If it's Trump on camera organizing something, that's huge. Anything in the middle is meh.

Should I turn on CNN now? I haven't messed with the news today. I don't want to be bored or pissed.
 
PhDeac said:
It's a video, at least that's the new evidence I heard about. If it's just more police fighting with angry white people, I don't think it will matter much. If it's Trump on camera organizing something, that's huge. Anything in the middle is meh.

Should I turn on CNN now? I haven't messed with the news today. I don't want to be bored or pissed.
Click to expand...

Sounds about right. And I think the debate about whether to have the trial at all starts at 1pm. I'm going to take a pass on today's proceedings.
 
Highland Deac said:
That was actually the talking point used by pretty much every Republican on the Sunday morning news shows yesterday, from GOP Senators to Chris Christie. Christie at least said that Trump should have been impeached by the House, but then said that as a former prosecutor he had some "concerns" about the constitutionality of removing someone who was already out of office. The GOP Senators just kept sidestepping the question of Trump's guilt by saying that convicting someone already out of office was unconstitutional. I'm sure that will be the final justification for nearly all of them in voting against conviction. With a few exceptions, they're just spineless, the lot of them.

What's even better is that a number of these guys - Cruz, Hawley, Cotton, Graham, Rand Paul - have serious presidential ambitions, and voting to convict Trump would actually help them in their goal to win the GOP nomination. And yet they'll all vote against it anyway, in hopes of pleasing Trump's base. If Trump does run in '24 and beats them yet again, one wonders what will be going through the minds of some of these toads. Instead of running for POTUS themselves, they may spend a good chunk of their political careers licking Trump's boots and doing his bidding like errand boys.
Click to expand...

Graham and Paul have non-delusional presidential ambitions? Gimme a break. The 2024 Pub primary is either Trump with only nominal competition (Sasse or Hogan), or it's Sasse/Hogan in the moderate lane, Haley in a yet to be chosen lane and some combination of Cruz, Hawley and maybe a Trump family member in the Trump lane. The open question is who Trumpians would support between Cruz, Hawley, Ivanka or Jr. I'm guessing Hawley.
 
cville deac said:
Graham and Paul have non-delusional presidential ambitions? Gimme a break. The 2024 Pub primary is either Trump with only nominal competition (Sasse or Hogan), or it's Sasse/Hogan in the moderate lane, Haley in a yet to be chosen lane and some combination of Cruz, Hawley and maybe a Trump family member in the Trump lane. The open question is who Trumpians would support between Cruz, Hawley, Ivanka or Jr. I'm guessing Hawley.
Click to expand...

haha, what a sad group of people to have to choose from...
 
cville deac said:
Graham and Paul have non-delusional presidential ambitions? Gimme a break. The 2024 Pub primary is either Trump with only nominal competition (Sasse or Hogan), or it's Sasse/Hogan in the moderate lane, Haley in a yet to be chosen lane and some combination of Cruz, Hawley and maybe a Trump family member in the Trump lane. The open question is who Trumpians would support between Cruz, Hawley, Ivanka or Jr. I'm guessing Hawley.
Click to expand...

I think Haley has already chosen her lane, whether she likes it or not.
 
warak said:
haha, what a sad group of people to have to choose from...
Click to expand...

Hogan has been a solid governor and isn't Trumpy in the least. I have a lot of philosophical disagreements with Sasse, but he's an interesting and smart guy. And I think he and Buttigieg are onto 1 thing that could help save the nation with their idea of a year of national service. But yeah, apart from those 2, the list is pretty bad.
 
cville deac said:
Graham and Paul have non-delusional presidential ambitions? Gimme a break. The 2024 Pub primary is either Trump with only nominal competition (Sasse or Hogan), or it's Sasse/Hogan in the moderate lane, Haley in a yet to be chosen lane and some combination of Cruz, Hawley and maybe a Trump family member in the Trump lane. The open question is who Trumpians would support between Cruz, Hawley, Ivanka or Jr. I'm guessing Hawley.
Click to expand...

In what world is Ben Sasse a "moderate"? He's as conservative as they come.
 
Ball State Deac said:
Sounds about right. And I think the debate about whether to have the trial at all starts at 1pm. I'm going to take a pass on today's proceedings.
Click to expand...

I don't think I'm going to watch unless there are witnesses.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top