Impeach!
-
“let’s have trial by combat” is not a great phrase to utter.
Yes, Giuliani said it. But if Himmler suggested something about killing Jews while Hitler is on the same stage - there’s not much distinction.Bullshit.
You can be prosecuted/impeached because of something that someone you associate with said?
Is that your point?
wrote on 11 Jan 2021, 02:33 last edited by xenon 1 Nov 2021, 02:41Bullshit.
You can be prosecuted/impeached because of something that someone you associate with said?
Is that your point?Let’s take this example to its extreme. If Guiliani says “you go mess up that Capitol. Go after senators. Etc. etc.”
And Trump goes on stage right after and says nothing about it. No culpability?
Also - the line for acceptable conduct by a President should not be criminality. So prosecution is different than impeachment. Impeachment is a lot fuzzier.
-
wrote on 11 Jan 2021, 02:33 last edited by
Impeachment is 100% appropriate. But for him, Wednesday would not have happened.
The moral hazard problem is real.
We must impose real costs on Hawley and Cruz. We can’t be doing this every 4 years.
-
Impeachment is 100% appropriate. But for him, Wednesday would not have happened.
The moral hazard problem is real.
We must impose real costs on Hawley and Cruz. We can’t be doing this every 4 years.
-
If you are 100% sure there was election stealing and you’ve exhausted every legal avenue, and you’re being stonewalled- an armed insurrection makes sense. What else do you do at that point?
The POTUS - who has the ability to get the best information says the election was 100% stolen.
There’s essentially no more representation at that point.
wrote on 11 Jan 2021, 02:37 last edited byIf you are 100% sure there was election stealing and you’ve exhausted every legal avenue, and you’re being stonewalled- an armed insurrection makes sense. What else do you do at that point?
The POTUS - who has the ability to get the best information says the election was 100% stolen.
There’s essentially no more representation at that point.
Lad, if that would have been an armed insurrection, you'd have dead bodies littering the grounds of the Capitol.
Those protesters weren't armed and you know it.
-
wrote on 11 Jan 2021, 02:38 last edited by jon-nyc 1 Nov 2021, 02:39
We can’t be doing this every 4 years.
You can count on this happening, regardless of which tribe is in power. The precedent is set.
[@Jolly]
Enjoy
[/@jolly]
Seems like we all should be saying “enjoy” to those that put him in office.
At any rate the only chance this doesn’t become the new normal is if we impose actual costs.
-
wrote on 11 Jan 2021, 02:40 last edited by
As I said there needs to be a downside to attempting to overturn elections besides “prolly won’t work”, otherwise we’ll see this every time.
-
We can’t be doing this every 4 years.
You can count on this happening, regardless of which tribe is in power. The precedent is set.
[@Jolly]
Enjoy
[/@jolly]
Seems like we all should be saying “enjoy” to those that put him in office.
At any rate the only chance this doesn’t become the new normal is if we impose actual costs.
wrote on 11 Jan 2021, 02:40 last edited byWe can’t be doing this every 4 years.
You can count on this happening, regardless of which tribe is in power. The precedent is set.
[@Jolly]
Enjoy
[/@jolly]
Seems like we all should be saying “enjoy” to those that put him in office.
At any rate the only chance this doesn’t become the new normal is if we impose actual costs.
Bork.
-
We can’t be doing this every 4 years.
You can count on this happening, regardless of which tribe is in power. The precedent is set.
[@Jolly]
Enjoy
[/@jolly]
Seems like we all should be saying “enjoy” to those that put him in office.
At any rate the only chance this doesn’t become the new normal is if we impose actual costs.
Bork.
wrote on 11 Jan 2021, 02:41 last edited bySorry this isn’t about chains of partisan grievances. We will always have those. It’s the assault on democracy itself that we must punish.
And we are.
Enjoy.
-
Sorry this isn’t about chains of partisan grievances. We will always have those. It’s the assault on democracy itself that we must punish.
And we are.
Enjoy.
wrote on 11 Jan 2021, 02:45 last edited bySorry this isn’t about chains of partisan grievances. We will always have those. It’s the assault on democracy itself that we must punish.
And we are.
Enjoy.
Let's hope it's not your son we have to pull out if a pool of blood in a muddy field.
That's the end result of the road you seem so hell-bent on traveling.
-
Sorry this isn’t about chains of partisan grievances. We will always have those. It’s the assault on democracy itself that we must punish.
And we are.
Enjoy.
wrote on 11 Jan 2021, 02:46 last edited by -
As I said there needs to be a downside to attempting to overturn elections besides “prolly won’t work”, otherwise we’ll see this every time.
wrote on 11 Jan 2021, 02:50 last edited byAs I said there needs to be a downside to attempting to overturn elections besides “prolly won’t work”, otherwise we’ll see this every time.
I see nothing wrong here
He tried to change the results. Why not?
He didn't change them.
Assuming the results are valid, the system worked just fine.
I don't see a problem.
-
Sorry this isn’t about chains of partisan grievances. We will always have those. It’s the assault on democracy itself that we must punish.
And we are.
Enjoy.
Let's hope it's not your son we have to pull out if a pool of blood in a muddy field.
That's the end result of the road you seem so hell-bent on traveling.
wrote on 11 Jan 2021, 02:51 last edited by jon-nyc 1 Nov 2021, 02:52Our choices:
1 Have it be such that there’s no cost in trying to overturn elections
2 Alienate Trump’s base
1 is the lesser of two evils, though they are indeed both evils. Again, this is an iterative game. If the new norm is “test the seams of democratic institutions if you lose” then we won’t have a republic to save before long. And not too long either.
-
Our choices:
1 Have it be such that there’s no cost in trying to overturn elections
2 Alienate Trump’s base
1 is the lesser of two evils, though they are indeed both evils. Again, this is an iterative game. If the new norm is “test the seams of democratic institutions if you lose” then we won’t have a republic to save before long. And not too long either.
wrote on 11 Jan 2021, 02:54 last edited by -
“Let’s have trial by content” from a guy sharing his stage.
See my comment about guilt by association.
@Aqua-Letifer said
George, do you believe impeachment shouldn't happen at all? That no one should even investigate the allegations?
I think it's a waste of time and money for an issue that is moot. Investigate away. Have at it. What do you think the result will be? What do you think it will accomplish other than political points?
wrote on 11 Jan 2021, 02:57 last edited byWhat do you think the result will be?
I honestly don't know.
What do you think it will accomplish other than political points?
Maybe after the completely uncalled-for and politically motivated investigation, Trump will claim that "history will tear to tatters the verdict of this court."
Maybe he'll leverage his poor and overly harsh treatment by the hypocritical, power-hungry and autocratic democrats, using his impeachment as proof of a failed system that should be completely dismantled.
Maybe he'll glorify the four dead and use the sensationalism of their deaths to get sympathizers elected. Maybe he'll start with the police captains. Everyone knows Trump has always supported the police and the left hates them all. It's so for-sure we don't even have to talk about that.
If we reversed the completely biased decision by social media companies to silence an innocent man based on toxic leftist politics, he wouldn't even have to fly around the country to help more Trumpists either rise to power or take more completely harmless tours of state houses come election time. All he would need would be his phone.
And maybe a shitload of people in the middle would all sort of just go along with it because everything I just said is so obviously TDS.
-
As I said there needs to be a downside to attempting to overturn elections besides “prolly won’t work”, otherwise we’ll see this every time.
I see nothing wrong here
He tried to change the results. Why not?
He didn't change them.
Assuming the results are valid, the system worked just fine.
I don't see a problem.
wrote on 11 Jan 2021, 03:01 last edited byAs I said there needs to be a downside to attempting to overturn elections besides “prolly won’t work”, otherwise we’ll see this every time.
I see nothing wrong here
He tried to change the results. Why not?
He didn't change them.
Assuming the results are valid, the system worked just fine.
I don't see a problem.
And that's the Truth. Every legal avenue was fought, inch by inch.
I guess now, when people fight an issue out in court or try to apply political pressure, they need to be canceled.
That is a very dangerous precedent, worthy of banana republics.
-
wrote on 11 Jan 2021, 03:06 last edited by
incited a mob that invaded the Capitol
- Please provide evidence.
- Do you support impeachment, then?
- If so, what will it accomplish, remove him from office?
- To me, it was pretty obvious that he was inciting the crowd. I cannot see how anybody does not see that. He may not have said specifically "go invade the Capital", but the video I saw, was meant to get the crowd incited. I do not think that President Trump actually thought people would invade the capital, but that is his fault or short sight. Not sure what he expected to happen?
(An example, a couple of times when going through security or customs, I have been pulled to the side, and they make a show of looking at my passport, checking my luggage.
Example conversation:
SECURITY AGENT: I see your flight leaves in an hour. I would hate for you to miss that flight. It would be good if we could get your problem resolved right now so you can make your flight.Is he SPECIFICALLY asking my for a bride? No, but it is pretty obvious what he wants.)
- No, I do not. I am not sure he is fit to be president anymore, so maybe the VP and cabinet removal is a better choice.
-
wrote on 11 Jan 2021, 03:15 last edited by
@George-K I think @jon-nyc replied how I would’ve, but to reiterate or expand...
First, Trump has been revving up his base for months about a stolen election, that is a lie. He lost in a landslide yet is telling his base over and over and over and over and over and over that the election was stolen and that America can’t let that happen. This is a sitting President doing this.
Then he called Georgia (only a week ago, isn’t that nuts?) to ask to find 11,780 votes to throw out. This is a sitting President doing this.
Then Wednesday he headlined a rally that has the name “save America!” (implies action is needed), says he will lead the march to the Capitol (to do what?) Other quotes from Trump himself:
- these people [protesters] aren’t going to take it anymore!
- we will never give up
- we will never concede
- we will stop the steal
- we are not gonna let it happen
- we must save our democracy
- were not going to stand and let this country be destroyed (he says variations of this about 30x btw)
- people are illegally taking over our government
- if you don’t fight like hell we aren’t going to have a country anymore
Oh and while the Capitol is actively being invaded and people killed he says he loves the people doing this.
This is a sitting president saying these things, lying about a stolen election, saying he will never concede, and telling his supporters to fight.
-
@George-K I think @jon-nyc replied how I would’ve, but to reiterate or expand...
First, Trump has been revving up his base for months about a stolen election, that is a lie. He lost in a landslide yet is telling his base over and over and over and over and over and over that the election was stolen and that America can’t let that happen. This is a sitting President doing this.
Then he called Georgia (only a week ago, isn’t that nuts?) to ask to find 11,780 votes to throw out. This is a sitting President doing this.
Then Wednesday he headlined a rally that has the name “save America!” (implies action is needed), says he will lead the march to the Capitol (to do what?) Other quotes from Trump himself:
- these people [protesters] aren’t going to take it anymore!
- we will never give up
- we will never concede
- we will stop the steal
- we are not gonna let it happen
- we must save our democracy
- were not going to stand and let this country be destroyed (he says variations of this about 30x btw)
- people are illegally taking over our government
- if you don’t fight like hell we aren’t going to have a country anymore
Oh and while the Capitol is actively being invaded and people killed he says he loves the people doing this.
This is a sitting president saying these things, lying about a stolen election, saying he will never concede, and telling his supporters to fight.
-
Sorry this isn’t about chains of partisan grievances. We will always have those. It’s the assault on democracy itself that we must punish.
And we are.
Enjoy.
Let's hope it's not your son we have to pull out if a pool of blood in a muddy field.
That's the end result of the road you seem so hell-bent on traveling.
wrote on 11 Jan 2021, 03:21 last edited by... It’s the assault on democracy itself that we must punish.
...Let's hope it's not your son we have to pull out if a pool of blood in a muddy field.
That's the end result of the road you seem so hell-bent on traveling.
@jon-nyc's direction, when compared to yours, leads to higher probabilities of peaceful transfers of power in the future.
-
... It’s the assault on democracy itself that we must punish.
...Let's hope it's not your son we have to pull out if a pool of blood in a muddy field.
That's the end result of the road you seem so hell-bent on traveling.
@jon-nyc's direction, when compared to yours, leads to higher probabilities of peaceful transfers of power in the future.
wrote on 11 Jan 2021, 03:27 last edited by... It’s the assault on democracy itself that we must punish.
...Let's hope it's not your son we have to pull out if a pool of blood in a muddy field.
That's the end result of the road you seem so hell-bent on traveling.
@jon-nyc's direction, when compared to yours, leads to higher probabilities of peaceful transfers of power in the future.
No. When you forcefully silence the people you don't agree with, the end result is always violence.
It's just a matter of time...
