The Damage Done to the Country
-
wrote on 2 Sept 2023, 00:43 last edited by
So, based on this statement
"Now we are enmeshed in at least four court trials on cooked-up charges that could as easily apply to a host of Democrats as to Trump."
Is he saying that if any Democrats were charged, (including President Biden I assume), they would be "cooked up charges? LOL
-
wrote on 2 Sept 2023, 00:55 last edited by
No, he's saying these are cooked up charges.
You're too young to remember when Nixon resigned, "for the good of the country". He was right to do so, even though he might not have been impeached, let alone removed from office.
Even today, I posted an article about McCartney and Biden's impeachment inquiry... The GOP will vote. The inquiry may not pass. You do that to play by the rules, for the good of the country. Compare that with Pelosi's declaration, without vote.
If Mr. Biden is impeached, if he is tried in a court of law, it will be because a much higher burden of proof is being met as compared to Mr. Trump.
Lastly... People who always sit on the fence wind up being shot at by both sides...
-
No, he's saying these are cooked up charges.
You're too young to remember when Nixon resigned, "for the good of the country". He was right to do so, even though he might not have been impeached, let alone removed from office.
Even today, I posted an article about McCartney and Biden's impeachment inquiry... The GOP will vote. The inquiry may not pass. You do that to play by the rules, for the good of the country. Compare that with Pelosi's declaration, without vote.
If Mr. Biden is impeached, if he is tried in a court of law, it will be because a much higher burden of proof is being met as compared to Mr. Trump.
Lastly... People who always sit on the fence wind up being shot at by both sides...
wrote on 2 Sept 2023, 01:06 last edited by@Jolly said in The Damage Done to the Country:
"for the good of the country".
Slightly off-topic - this was exactly Nixon's reason for not contesting the 1960 election.
-
@Jolly said in The Damage Done to the Country:
"for the good of the country".
Slightly off-topic - this was exactly Nixon's reason for not contesting the 1960 election.
wrote on 2 Sept 2023, 01:31 last edited by@George-K Too bad the same thoughts did not hold in 2020
-
wrote on 2 Sept 2023, 01:51 last edited by
There is some precedent for disputing results, albeit not to the extent Trump took it. Gore still says he won.
-
wrote on 2 Sept 2023, 04:54 last edited by Axtremus 9 Feb 2023, 04:56
An incumbent refusing to acknowledge a loss is also different from a challenger refusing to actually loss. The incumbent still holds the power, refusing to acknowledge a loss is tentamount to refusing to relinquish power — very bad for peaceful transfer of power. A challenger refusing to acknowledge a loss does not affect the transfer of power away from the incumbent.
-
wrote on 2 Sept 2023, 11:32 last edited by
Entire thread went over your head, didn't it?
-
No, he's saying these are cooked up charges.
You're too young to remember when Nixon resigned, "for the good of the country". He was right to do so, even though he might not have been impeached, let alone removed from office.
Even today, I posted an article about McCartney and Biden's impeachment inquiry... The GOP will vote. The inquiry may not pass. You do that to play by the rules, for the good of the country. Compare that with Pelosi's declaration, without vote.
If Mr. Biden is impeached, if he is tried in a court of law, it will be because a much higher burden of proof is being met as compared to Mr. Trump.
Lastly... People who always sit on the fence wind up being shot at by both sides...
wrote on 12 Sept 2023, 21:40 last edited by jon-nyc 9 Dec 2023, 21:41@Jolly said in The Damage Done to the Country:
Even today, I posted an article about McCartney and Biden's impeachment inquiry... The GOP will vote. The inquiry may not pass. You do that to play by the rules, for the good of the country. Compare that with Pelosi's declaration, without vote.
Nope. He declared, no vote. Presumably you’re pissed about that?
You know, “good of the country” and all?
-
wrote on 12 Sept 2023, 21:50 last edited by Mik 9 Dec 2023, 21:51
If you have enough to impeach you should have enough to charge. Otherwise, it's just fiddling while Rome burns, especially with a Dem Senate.
I have no issue with investigating what looks an awful lot like corruption. But bring it to fruition or let it go. You can't claim to be the party of morals and standards and then behave just like the opposition.
-
@Jolly said in The Damage Done to the Country:
Even today, I posted an article about McCartney and Biden's impeachment inquiry... The GOP will vote. The inquiry may not pass. You do that to play by the rules, for the good of the country. Compare that with Pelosi's declaration, without vote.
Nope. He declared, no vote. Presumably you’re pissed about that?
You know, “good of the country” and all?
wrote on 13 Sept 2023, 04:50 last edited by@jon-nyc said in The Damage Done to the Country:
@Jolly said in The Damage Done to the Country:
Even today, I posted an article about McCartney and Biden's impeachment inquiry... The GOP will vote. The inquiry may not pass. You do that to play by the rules, for the good of the country. Compare that with Pelosi's declaration, without vote.
Nope. He declared, no vote. Presumably you’re pissed about that?
You know, “good of the country” and all?
I'd like to have seen a vote.