sancarlos wrote: ↑Wed Sep 13, 2023 10:47 am
If they can get people to say “they’re all corrupt”, that can only work in Trump’s favor.
And, I’ve heard people say it.
Yeah, I think an impeachment inquiry moves the needle way more than random accusations of corruption because it will be covered as an impeachment in the press. It doesn't matter whether the House ultimately votes to impeach Biden or not - just having it out there for months will do the job.
Like Benghazi. And Her Emails.
D, do you think the MAGAs will vote in force if Trump isn't the nominee?
Edit: In other words, what Brian and Dave just said.
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: ↑Wed Sep 13, 2023 11:22 amD, do you think the MAGAs will vote in force if Trump isn't the nominee?
I think it depends on how that goes down. A brawl where the party turns on them and Trump goes scorched earth? No. But a scenario where Trump ceases to have the will to do this or signs off on a candidate who pledges fealty? Sure. And I've wondered if the path to maintaining that MAGA base has shifted away from Trump and more to them as a whole, like where pledging to help the J6ers is nearly as important as being Trump himself.
Johnnie wrote: ↑Sat Sep 10, 2022 8:13 pmOh shit, you just reminded me about toilet paper.
BeckyHammon’s hoodie wrote: ↑Tue Sep 12, 2023 10:36 pm
It looks like the House is going to impeach Biden and in doing so will accomplish jerking off their extreme base and pissing off moderates. The complete incompetence of GOP leadership is the only blessing in these shitty times
They are going to open an impeachment inquiry. They are going to need to try to find some sliver of something to hang an impeachment on. I think they will keep it at the inquiry stage and make a ton of viral clips saying "Biden is so corrupt we have to have a Congressional impeachment inquiry." They'll milk the fuck out of the inquiry, because they only need the appearance of Biden being corrupt, they don't want to actually have televised hearings that expose they have nothing. Unless, of course, they find something. I mean, they spent 5 years of a Special Counsel investigation on Hunter to come up with an underpayment of taxes.
The GOP has been calling Biden corrupt for a decade now? How does an impeachment inquiry where they don’t pull the trigger move the needle at all? If anything, it makes them look weak and Biden stronger. “See, the House looked into it and they didn’t find anything”
You’re also ascribing a level of competence and confidence in McCarthy that is completely unwarranted. The inmates are running that particular asylum and they want payback for the Trump impeachments and will find any sham pretense to do so.
In doing so, I think it will only strengthen Biden’s appeal and his election argument that the Dems are the only adults in the room.
I don't ascribe any competence onto McCarthy, I agree with you that he is being forced by the lunatic MAGA fringe to open the inquiry under threat of removing his Speaker title. McCarthy has nothing, knows he has nothing, and I don't think he wants to go forward (yet), but is being forced. In today's climate, you don't need any evidence of an actual crime or ethics violation. You make it up, say you are investigating, and the base and some less informed members of the public will believe it. If you took a poll and excluded informed Dems/Liberals, the rest of the people would say Biden is corrupt or unethical because of Hunter. Say it enough times, it becomes truth. I've heard non-MAGA people saying Joe made millions off of Hunter's dealings with Buresema. Perfect example is the Devon Archer testimony. Former Hunter Biden associate made all sorts of allegations. Upon questioning before Congress, he had no evidence to support any of the allegations, but the media reporting the allegations is what less informed people walk away with. RW media consumers will walk away from a Biden impeachment inquiry thinking it is equivalent to an impeachment proceeding. "See, Biden is being impeached, he is corrupt!" Dragging on the inquiry with no actual findings won't matter, they can still say he is an impeached President. Facts don't matter. Trump says it frequently, "make the allegation and I'll spin the argument." Facts aren't needed. This was the basis of his "perfect call with Ukraine." He told the Ukranians to bring charges, it doesn't matter if there is evidence, just that there were charges.
An honest to God cult of personality - formed around a failed steak salesman.
-Pruitt
mister d wrote: ↑Wed Sep 13, 2023 11:32 am
It also doesn't help that his son is likely pretty corrupt.
Yeah, no way I'll vote for him again.
But more seriously, it does not help that Hunter is shady. And it'll be frustrating watching Hunter Biden's doings have more of an effect on the election than the doings of the Kushners and Junior Trumps.
This is another example of the dynamic from 2016 - the Dem candidate has strengths and weaknesses. In the areas where the Dem is strong, Trump is really bad. And in the areas where the Dem is weak, Trump is a fucking disaster.
And his one problem is he didn’t go to Russia that night because he had extracurricular activities, and they froze to death.
mister d wrote: ↑Wed Sep 13, 2023 11:32 am
It also doesn't help that his son is likely pretty corrupt.
Yeah, no way I'll vote for him again.
But more seriously, it does not help that Hunter is shady. And it'll be frustrating watching Hunter Biden's doings have more of an effect on the election than the doings of the Kushners and Junior Trumps.
This is another example of the dynamic from 2016 - the Dem candidate has strengths and weaknesses. In the areas where the Dem is strong, Trump is really bad. And in the areas where the Dem is weak, Trump is a fucking disaster.
Hunter is incredibly problematic for sure, but I give Biden a ton of credit for stepping back and removing all appearances of involvement in the investigations. Biden allowed the Trump-appointed US Attorney investigating Hunter to stay on when it would have been completely normal to fire him and appoint his own US Attorney. Now Garland appointed him as a Special Counsel, so he doesn't have to report to Garland. Unfortunately, none of that matters, as Republicans freaked out over the appointment, saying Garland and Biden picked a favorable SC. FFS, they allowed the Trump appointed and Barr assigned USA to stay on. There is nothing they won't lie about to argue corruption. Biden should have just shut it down, and they would have made the same allegations of corruption anyways, and wouldn't have indictments and likely conviction to harp on.
Drives me nuts hearing people say Hunter is getting special treatment and anyone else would have been in prison. Nobody else would have faced a 5 year US Attorney investigation in search of a crime unless their father was a Dem President. OTOH, Jared and the Trump boys openly committed hundreds of ethics and criminal violations and nothing was ever done. Imagine what would happen if DOJ opened an investigation into Jared, or if they prosecuted him for lying on his security clearance forms 90+ times. I know I keep bringing this up, but any other federal employee would face prosecution for that. Jared never actually earned a clearance, but Trump demanded they give him clearance. Trump and his family openly used their position for personal and never even tried to hide it. Hunter is nowhere near the White House, and they are making very tenuous allegations of things they openly did for years!
An honest to God cult of personality - formed around a failed steak salesman.
-Pruitt
Yeah, I'll def say that Biden is (seemingly) separating the dad from the politician perfectly here. Which still doesn't matter because Hunter being like he is provides cover for Trump's shit kids.
Johnnie wrote: ↑Sat Sep 10, 2022 8:13 pmOh shit, you just reminded me about toilet paper.
The Sybian wrote: ↑Wed Sep 13, 2023 1:02 pm
Republicans freaked out over the appointment, saying Garland and Biden picked a favorable SC.
A SC that ~30 Republican Senators demanded be made the SC.
Trump and his family openly used their position for personal and never even tried to hide it. Hunter is nowhere near the White House, and they are making very tenuous allegations of things they openly did for years!
Remember....every Republican accusation is a confession.
brian wrote: ↑Sat Oct 28, 2023 2:51 pm
This thread was on Page 5 somehow.
Anyway. We don’t have Mike Pence to kick around any more. He can go back to toadying for Trump.
New host of "The 700 Club"?
Never wish death on a man, but bleeding piles and gout should be a part of Pence's life until that strange and sorrowful day when he dies and then suddenly realizes that he was completely wrong.l
mister d wrote: ↑Fri Sep 08, 2023 2:59 pm
It just kinda seems like "most electable" is cover for what they're really doing. Biden wasn't the most electable candidate last time and definitely isn't this time.
He might be this time only because if they replace him, it's essentially saying that he wasn't a good president. And if he wasn't a good president, why vote for a Democrat when they're responsible?
So, while I didn't like him as the choice last time and I wish we weren't stuck with him this time, I think it's the right play. Anyone else is a huge risk.
Johnnie wrote: ↑Sat Sep 10, 2022 8:13 pmOh shit, you just reminded me about toilet paper.
L-Jam3 wrote: ↑Sun Nov 05, 2023 3:30 pm
If that is a poll of people who pick up landlines, then it is functionally worthless.
And, nobody with a cell phone answers a number they don’t recognize.
The worst is when you are expecting a call and not sure what area code. I have an insurance claim and don’t want to miss their call, so I’m answering every unknown call and it’s brutal. No, I’m not interested in solar panels or donating to a made up police organization.
An honest to God cult of personality - formed around a failed steak salesman.
-Pruitt
A_B wrote: ↑Tue Dec 19, 2023 6:22 pm
Well huh. Colorado did something.
Oh well, our democracy was nice while it lasted.
God I hope SCOTUS reverses this thing in like 15 minutes. The last thing any Democrat should want is antionwide rule that state courts can disqualify presidential candidates if they feel like it.
This will be exactly what GOP state legislatures and courts will point to when they decide that Trump earned their state's electoral votes even though Biden came out ahead in the vote count.
And his one problem is he didn’t go to Russia that night because he had extracurricular activities, and they froze to death.
A_B wrote: ↑Tue Dec 19, 2023 6:22 pm
Well huh. Colorado did something.
Oh well, our democracy was nice while it lasted.
God I hope SCOTUS reverses this thing in like 15 minutes. The last thing any Democrat should want is antionwide rule that state courts can disqualify presidential candidates if they feel like it.
This will be exactly what GOP state legislatures and courts will point to when they decide that Trump earned their state's electoral votes even though Biden came out ahead in the vote count.
Yeah strong agree. Philosophically and legally I agree with the opinion but politically it’s a disaster and will absolutely be abused in red states to disqualify Dem candidates under any number of specious pretexts.
I thought states got to set their own voting ruless.
Also it hasn’t been too much of an issue with other presidents committing treason. So maybe it isn’t the end of the world if this holds. 14th amendment doesn’t cover “ we don’t like them” I don’t think.
You know what you need? A lyrical sucker punch to the face.
A_B wrote: ↑Tue Dec 19, 2023 6:54 pm
I thought states got to set their own voting ruless.
Isn’t that exactly the problem? They’ll disqualify all Dem candidates just because they can.
In the end I suspect the Supremes will overturn this for a number of reasons most notably that Trump hasn’t been convicted (yet) of any insurrectionist crimes.
A_B wrote: ↑Tue Dec 19, 2023 6:54 pm
I thought states got to set their own voting ruless.
Isn’t that exactly the problem? They’ll disqualify all Dem candidates just because they can.
In the end I suspect the Supremes will overturn this for a number of reasons most notably that Trump hasn’t been convicted (yet) of any insurrectionist crimes.
I added a bit more context. I totally get your argument. I just don’t think it’s as open ended as you seem to think.
You know what you need? A lyrical sucker punch to the face.
A_B wrote: ↑Tue Dec 19, 2023 6:54 pm
I thought states got to set their own voting ruless.
Also it hasn’t been too much of an issue with other presidents committing treason. So maybe it isn’t the end of the world if this holds. 14th amendment doesn’t cover “ we don’t like them” I don’t think.
You don’t think it’s treason for Biden to leave the border open and do nothing while the United States is invaded?
States set the procedure for selecting electors. But Article II of the Constitution determines who is and isn’t eligible.
Edit: Also, in response to Brian’s last point, Trump hasn’t even been *charged* with insurrection.
Last edited by Steve of phpBB on Tue Dec 19, 2023 7:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.
And his one problem is he didn’t go to Russia that night because he had extracurricular activities, and they froze to death.
Eta the entire purpose of constitutional law is giving power to lawyers/judiciary when it is not necessarily stated in the words of the constitution. Qualifies as ironic that the supreme Court ignoring conservative legal ideology is what will keep Biden in office when Trump is allowed to run
Gosh, I don't know with this one. Possibly because I've been aware of the issue for a total of 10 minutes.
It's hard to imagine that the 14th amendment meant to disqualify Presidential electors who engage in insurrection (it literally says the electors are disqualified) but not the President himself. I have to think that if John Q. Yankeekiller ran for President in 1868, he would have been disqualified.
Yet that seems to be the best avenue to overturn the decision. Maybe you should need some sort of criminal conviction for insurrection, rather than a finding in a civil case under a much lower standard of proof? But the amendment doesn't say that. What's a textualist to do?
Or… while I don’t agree with either of their methods, at least the 9/11 had a debatable point.
I don’t know how you guys do it. I feel like if I were still on Facebook I’d commemorate today saying I wish all Trump supporters get leprosy of the penis and clitoris, because anyone who still supports TFG after January 6th doesn’t deserve to enjoy sex.
My avatar corresponds on my place in the Swamp posting list with the all-time Home Run list. Number 45 is Paul Konerko with 439.
L-Jam3 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 06, 2024 2:01 pmI don’t know how you guys do it.
I just recognize that there are enough people across all forms of social media with greater influence than me who are basically going to say the same thing.
Unless I can become a bigger voice than them, it ain't worth it.
So posting to my 700+ friends on Facebook, the vast majority of which already share my views, will be like preaching to a choir.
mister d wrote:Couldn't have pegged me better.
EnochRoot wrote:I mean, whatever. Johnnie's all hot cuz I ride him.
Fuck Kamala Harris. Shut down the connector all the way to the airport. Ima shoot if I see her. Delaying the whole city for an hour isn't the way to get votes
HaulCitgo wrote: ↑Tue Jan 09, 2024 3:18 pm
Fuck Kamala Harris. Shut down the connector all the way to the airport. Ima shoot if I see her. Delaying the whole city for an hour isn't the way to get votes
With all the got damn rednecks that haul ass all over I-85 in Atlanta? I can support them shutting down a highway to get her where she needs to be.
HaulCitgo wrote: ↑Tue Jan 09, 2024 3:18 pm
Fuck Kamala Harris. Shut down the connector all the way to the airport. Ima shoot if I see her. Delaying the whole city for an hour isn't the way to get votes
With all the got damn rednecks that haul ass all over I-85 in Atlanta? I can support them shutting down a highway to get her where she needs to be.
