Impeachment Thread

[jomar]

Not guilty

Total vindication!

 

[YDB95]

Which has WHAT to do with UK leaving the EU?

I already said, nothing. My point was simply that Box's nonsensical comments were as impressive a rewrite of history as Dumpington is always providing us with. All that was missing were a couple of his trademark namedrops. You're the one missing the point here.

Let’s hope so. Gallup released a new poll yesterday showing Trump’s approval rating is now the highest of his presidency.

Yes, at 49%. With 50% disapproving. In other words, even at the highest point of his presidency, he's still underwater. Incidentally, the same thing happened with Clinton: his popularity spiked briefly after he was acquitted.

It’s even higher than Obama’s approval rating at this stage of his presidency.

True, Obama was at 45% in February 2012. But that was in the middle of a sluggish recovery that was exacerbated by a Republican House tying his hands behind his back for two years. So we're talking 45% in the midst of a rough economy and on the heels of two years of stalemate, vs 49% on the heels of a major political victory in which his support among his own party is topped out and literally can't get any higher. Context, folks.

 

[KeithD]

Total vindication!

At the hands of the Senate Republicans. Everyone remember that in November.

 

[gunthernehmen]

Total vindication!

Yes, that's what "Not Guilty" means.

 

[gunthernehmen]

I already said, nothing. My point was simply that Box's nonsensical comments were as impressive a rewrite of history as Dumpington is always providing us with. All that was missing were a couple of his trademark namedrops. You're the one missing the point here.

In your patented fashion, then you are either too stupid to comprehend or just blindly playing your character.

Honestly, I can't tell. It's a toss up.

 

[YDB95]

Yes, that's what "Not Guilty" means.

No, legally it just means there was insufficient proof of guilt. And that's without even touching on the fact that some of the senators who voted to acquit said he was guilty, they just didn't think it should be an impeachable offence.

 

[KeithD]

Oh, I think that posters saying the X Republican Senator voted to acquit Donald Trump will look just fine being waved around in the November election campaign.

 

[gunthernehmen]

No, legally it just means there was insufficient proof of guilt. And that's without even touching on the fact that some of the senators who voted to acquit said he was guilty, they just didn't think it should be an impeachable offence.

Look, I know I didn't go to Yale like you did, so forgive this poor migrant worker.

Not Guilty is the verdict for the offenses with which he was charged. THAT is the end of that.

If Trump is impeached for something else in his next term, so be it. We can get another verdict on that. But THIS one is Not Guilty.

 

[YDB95]

Not Guilty is the verdict for the offenses with which he was charged. THAT is the end of that.

True, but that's not what you said above.

 

[gunthernehmen]

True, but that's not what you said above.

I'll repeat it, paraphrased for my own amusement:

President Trump remains the President of the United States of America.

 

[YDB95]

I'll repeat it, paraphrased for my own amusement:

President Trump remains the President of the United States of America.

Again, true but not what you said above.

 

[gunthernehmen]

Again, true.

We're in agreement.

 

[jomar]

Yes, that's what "Not Guilty" means.

Jury nullification!

 

[gunthernehmen]

Jury nullification!

Is ALWAYS an appropriate dope slap to a corrupt prosecution.

However, in this case, it was a clear verdict delivered on the merits of the case.

Prosecution fell flat on her face and paid the price.

 

[phrodeau]

If the jury is shit, you can’t acquit.

 

[phrodeau]

Is ALWAYS an appropriate dope slap to a corrupt prosecution.

However, in this case, it was a clear verdict delivered on the merits of the case.

Prosecution fell flat on her face and paid the price.

If the prosecution was sooo bad, why didn’t the defense call witnesses?

 

[gunthernehmen]

If the prosecution was sooo bad, why didn’t the defense call witnesses?

With THAT prosecution? Why bother? In a real court the defense would have motioned to dismiss or whatever it is when the prosecution barely wakes up and the judges would have granted it.

This was never anything other than a political witch hunt.

I'm sure the next attempt is already being drafted.

Just as I'm sure the impending impeachments of Sanders, Biden or Doomberg are already being prepared with appropriate blanks where needed.

Your party may have FINALLY gotten the Reps to stoop to your level. And it's going to be hilarious to watch.

 

[icanhelp1]

With THAT prosecution? Why bother? In a real court the defense would have motioned to dismiss or whatever it is when the prosecution barely wakes up and the judges would have granted it.

This was never anything other than a political witch hunt.

I'm sure the next attempt is already being drafted.

Just as I'm sure the impending impeachments of Sanders, Biden or Doomberg are already being prepared with appropriate blanks where needed.

Your party may have FINALLY gotten the Reps to stoop to your level. And it's going to be hilarious to watch.

Phro is trolling you. If the prosecution is weak the case is dismissed. The defense doesn't call for witnesses!!!! They walk out of court. Phro is a fucking idiot!!

 

[jomar]

Is ALWAYS an appropriate dope slap to a corrupt prosecution.

However, in this case, it was a clear verdict delivered on the merits of the case.

Prosecution fell flat on her face and paid the price.

Keep telling yourself that. Even Republicans think he did what he was accused of and the Democrats proved it, they just let him get away with it.

 

[phrodeau]

Trump admitted today that he still believes seeking election interference from foreign countries is fine. He learned nothing from being impeached. He will need to be impeached again and again until he learns.

 

[gunthernehmen]

Keep telling yourself that. Even Republicans think he did what he was accused of and the Democrats proved it, they just let him get away with it.

He was accused of doing his job and yes, he is guilty of that.

The Democrat Party is simply upset that the President is being EFFECTIVE at his job.

 

[phrodeau]

With THAT prosecution? Why bother? In a real court the defense would have motioned to dismiss or whatever it is when the prosecution barely wakes up and the judges would have granted it.

This was never anything other than a political witch hunt.

I'm sure the next attempt is already being drafted.

Just as I'm sure the impending impeachments of Sanders, Biden or Doomberg are already being prepared with appropriate blanks where needed.

Your party may have FINALLY gotten the Reps to stoop to your level. And it's going to be hilarious to watch.

Why bother? Political reasons, plain and simple.

If Trump was truly innocent and took the steps to prove it, he wouldn't have to worry about getting re-elected. He would have much more political capital to get his agenda through Congress. He might even make the front page of his hometown newspaper.

That Trump didn't take these politically expedient steps shows more than anything else that he was guilty and deserved every impeachment vote he got.

 

[jomar]

He was accused of doing his job and yes, he is guilty of that.

Withholding approved aid from a country so he can get a political favor is doing his job?

The Democrat Party is simply upset that the President is being EFFECTIVE at his job.

If tweeting were his job I'd agree.

 

[gunthernehmen]

If Trump was truly innocent and took the steps to prove it, he wouldn't have to TLDR

He mounted an appropriate and obviously effective defense against the shoddiest prosecution I've seen outside of Law and Order, Mayberry Edition.

If YOU knew what you were talking about, you'd be prepping for yet another successful defense against unjust accusations, defending one of your clients. But I'll bet you aren't.

Withholding approved aid from a country so he can get a political favor is doing his job?

If tweeting were his job I'd agree.

Implementing foreign policy certainly is his job.

 

[icanhelp1]

Withholding approved aid from a country so he can get a political favor is doing his job?



If tweeting were his job I'd agree.

What political favor?