Johnnie wrote: ↑Sat Feb 13, 2021 7:47 pm
Counter point, echoing DSafe:
This means what, exactly? It sounds to me she's claiming the middle ground. How's this a bad thing again?
When people say that, they mean there should be an opposition party strong enough to control their crazies and dedicated to democracy even if they have different policy goals.
She isn’t saying that McConnell and McCarthy and Cruz and Hawley should have more power.
And his one problem is he didn’t go to Russia that night because he had extracurricular activities, and they froze to death.
EnochRoot wrote: ↑Sat Feb 13, 2021 11:51 pm
Why the witnesses were scrapped.
Witnesses would have done nothing, They got 57 votes to convict, even with witnesses they weren't getting any others to convict. Fuck a DT supporter was after Mitch's grandkids and still voted to acquit.
Johnnie wrote: ↑Sat Feb 13, 2021 11:56 pm
Looks like a party in complete disarray and is in crisis mode to me.
Good grief dude. Guys like Hawley and Cruz fell over themselves to sign onto the insurrection because they want to inherit Trump’s base when its their turn to run. And his base hates politicians. Do you think Trump’s brand is going to expand once all the graft gets exposed? The civil suits? The criminal charges he and his family face at the state and federal levels? The GOP already views him as a cancer, particularly once he inserts his brand into the ‘22 races. A cancer they decided they can’t live without.
Johnnie wrote: ↑Sun Feb 14, 2021 7:01 amAnd there will always be conservative Democrats to assist them too.
Yes the last election was too fucking close, but I think this part has it backwards. There’s no reason to think that conservative Dems want to return to minority status or are taking steps to accomplish that. And to the extent the two or three conservative Dems are preventing the other Dems from doing certain things, it’s because they believe reining the others in will help Dems keep power - and there’s every reason to think they’re right.
There’s no reason to think that the Dems will return to winning Senate seats in the Dakotas if they do more liberal stuff.
And his one problem is he didn’t go to Russia that night because he had extracurricular activities, and they froze to death.
Nonlinear FC wrote: ↑Sun Feb 14, 2021 12:51 am
It's like you guys don't understand that even though specific politicians get re-elected the overall trend of politics is crushing the GOP.
No ... that’s actually a big part of it. We all know the country as a whole is trending left, the concern is what the Republicans will do to retain power and just how quickly the Dems will lay down.
Johnnie wrote: ↑Sat Sep 10, 2022 8:13 pmOh shit, you just reminded me about toilet paper.
mister d wrote: ↑Sun Feb 14, 2021 11:14 am... and just how quickly the Dems will lay down.
I dunno, man. Given how many times you’ve expressed ambivalence about whether the Dems or Rs actually win elections, I don’t know if you’re really in position to accuse the *Dems* of being willing to lay down to the Republicans.
And his one problem is he didn’t go to Russia that night because he had extracurricular activities, and they froze to death.
Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Sun Feb 14, 2021 11:16 am
Anyway, about witnesses ...
Can we move the fuck on from this clown show?
Who gives a fuck if they didn't call witnesses, they could have called the rioters and they could say first hand they got their orders from Trump and it still wouldn't have mattered. This country continues to go to shit, people out of work, unemployment backed up and what are Dems doing, still fighting Trump. The whole election and what they have based on has been a huge lie so far. Like the 2K payments Biden promised if Dems won Georgia.
I'll suggest that Lindsey Graham is a spent force as well.
A suck up and a weasel, but his words are as meaningful as Giuliani's.
LOL.. Keep living under the rock that you don't think Biden or Harris will be impeached if the repubs win the House back in 2022. Graham says this, but so has Nunes, Greene, McCarthy..
I think the Dems while they have the WH, Senate, and House need to play hard ball the next 2 years and make it harder for the Repubs and stop this fair, lets be friends shit.
EnochRoot wrote: ↑Sat Feb 13, 2021 11:51 pm
Why the witnesses were scrapped.
Witnesses would have done nothing, They got 57 votes to convict, even with witnesses they weren't getting any others to convict. Fuck a DT supporter was after Mitch's grandkids and still voted to acquit.
I'm going to agree with Nate here. If they called witnesses, the GOP would have dragged it out. Anyone in Trump's orbit would refuse to show, then they'd have to subpoena, and the witnesses would challenge it. It'd be dragged out for potentially months in court, and ultimately not change a damn thing, other than make the Dems look bad for dragging it out for months when we have more a national crisis to worry about.
An honest to God cult of personality - formed around a failed steak salesman.
-Pruitt
Do you guys think it would "look bad"? You can do everything as nicely as possible and the GOP will still find some molehill to make into Mount Everest.
Pack a vest for your james in the city of intercourse
Time is not on Biden's side and the GOP knows this, unfortunately.
They have less than 2 years to try to ram through any and all legislation possible and spending political capital on witnesses for a failed impeachment doesn't seem to be the best course of action. I hate it too.
You simply can't walk and chew gum at the same time unless it's to bailout millionaires and billionaires in this country. 🤷♂️
mister d wrote:Couldn't have pegged me better.
EnochRoot wrote:I mean, whatever. Johnnie's all hot cuz I ride him.
I'll suggest that Lindsey Graham is a spent force as well.
A suck up and a weasel, but his words are as meaningful as Giuliani's.
LOL.. Keep living under the rock that you don't think Biden or Harris will be impeached if the repubs win the House back in 2022. Graham says this, but so has Nunes, Greene, McCarthy..
I think the Dems while they have the WH, Senate, and House need to play hard ball the next 2 years and make it harder for the Repubs and stop this fair, lets be friends shit.
The view from my rock is pretty clear.
I do agree that the Dems need to be as nasty as the GOP has been.
"beautiful, with an exotic-yet-familiar facial structure and an arresting gaze."
EnochRoot wrote: ↑Sat Feb 13, 2021 11:51 pm
Why the witnesses were scrapped.
Witnesses would have done nothing, They got 57 votes to convict, even with witnesses they weren't getting any others to convict. Fuck a DT supporter was after Mitch's grandkids and still voted to acquit.
I'm going to agree with Nate here. If they called witnesses, the GOP would have dragged it out. Anyone in Trump's orbit would refuse to show, then they'd have to subpoena, and the witnesses would challenge it. It'd be dragged out for potentially months in court, and ultimately not change a damn thing, other than make the Dems look bad for dragging it out for months when we have more a national crisis to worry about.
There isn’t any argument. I didn’t say witnesses would’ve made a difference. I simply posted a tweet yesterday referencing a story that gives a reason as to why the witnesses were scrapped, and Steve’s post earlier today from Daniel Goldman explains the soundness of that decision.
First, let’s remember that this case had unusual and powerful evidence in the public record. If you are prosecuting a bank robbery and you have the surveillance camera footage, you don’t need witnesses to tell you what happened.
1/
Second, the only areas where witnesses could help was confirming what the circumstantial evidence already showed about Trump’s knowledge and intent, both before and after the riot. Mgrs did great job of using his own tweets to show his knowledge but witnesses could confirm.
2/
The case was really strong as is but new witness testimony would very likely become the sole focus of the media and the public. For that reason, it is especially important to avoid taking risks with witnesses a) who are adverse to you and b) whose testimony is unknown.
3/
Since the only witnesses that would be helpful are ones close to Trump, executive privilege would invariably be an issue. If a witness is not cooperative, s/he would likely fall back on EP to avoid testifying. Hashing that out would take months.
4/
The reality is that Trump has created a dynamic through the Ukraine whistleblower and Ukraine witnesses where his domestic terrorist supporters threaten violence against witnesses against him. This fear is real and it is a huge problem. This should be everyone’s focus.
5/
Managers tried to find witnesses who a) could provide direct evidence about Trump’s state of mind, b) who were willing to testify and were cooperative so no surprises and no litigation, and c) who would do no harm to the already strong case.
6/
Beutler’s public statement was very helpful because it confirmed Trump’s sociopathic disregard for the line of succession in the Capitol. That was very helpful. Beutler endured open witness intimidation from colleagues and probably others — that should be the story.
7/
Finally, @RepRaskin is right that if their powerful case did not convince 67 to convict, nothing would. Why dilute their case, delay the trial, potentially put people in harm’s way or endure lengthy litigation, only to get marginally more info about facts that everyone knows?
8/
Trump’s requests to call Pelosi or 100 witnesses were empty threats — they didn’t have a single witness who could have helped them. That should not have been a factor. But if they were smart, they could have made the witnesses look lopsided and unfair if they didn’t get any.
9/
It was the right call to proceed as they did. They got important evidence at no cost that bolstered an already strong case. Witnesses were not necessary to the case and witnesses purely for witnesses sake is bad strategy. The outrage should be at the witness intimidation.
Gunpowder wrote: ↑Sun Feb 14, 2021 9:42 pm
Do you guys think it would "look bad"? You can do everything as nicely as possible and the GOP will still find some molehill to make into Mount Everest.
This is why an investigatory commission makes the most sense to me. Absolutely needs to happen, and doesn’t tie up the rest of congress. Include one or two of the R yes votes as well to make it bipartisan.
