What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

***Official Donald J. Trump Impeachment (Whistleblower) Thread*** (4 Viewers)

Some Republicans, even while acknowledging that Trump did what he was being accused of, says he should not be removed from office. 

Is it possible to be found guilty of the accusations, but disagree on the penalty? Granted, a censure or some other argument is essentially a punish-less penalty, but is it fair to think the punishment is also excessive?

 
Between the Russian investigation and now the impeachment debacle, Its like watching the nerdy kid (democrats) tryout for the baseball team, where he continually swings and misses. You are sitting in the bleachers praying to God to let him just get a piece of it, a foul ball...anything, but nope swing and a miss over and over again. Agonizing for everyone involved.
You want so hard to be liked by some and disliked by others.  Seems to me like you have not moved the needle with either group, almost like you are not being heard at all.

 
So amusing that people here are blaming the Democrats as if they made any real mistakes in this process. They haven’t. 

Donald Trump is being charged with a high crime. There is a witness with direct knowledge of Trump’s guilt or innocence and the Republicans will not allow him to testify, and they’re going to acquit the President. 

Thats what the public is going to remember. This will not be a “victory” for the Republicans. It’s a debacle. 

 
Murkowski's statement for any who did not see it.

- Yep, there is something really weird going on here.
The continued claims of partisanship at the hands of the House Dems specifically implies that the articles themselves are false, correct?  Why then, as the most deliberative body of government and a member of the opposing party, not want prove these charges false?  This response seems just partisan in nature as that which she’s calling out

 
So amusing that people here are blaming the Democrats as if they made any real mistakes in this process. They haven’t. 

Donald Trump is being charged with a high crime. There is a witness with direct knowledge of Trump’s guilt or innocence and the Republicans will not allow him to testify, and they’re going to acquit the President. 

Thats what the public is going to remember. This will not be a “victory” for the Republicans. It’s a debacle. 
Their mistake was bringing a weak case to the Senate. They should have subpoenaed Bolton at the House level. Oh it's a victory now and probably in November

 
So amusing that people here are blaming the Democrats as if they made any real mistakes in this process. They haven’t. 

Donald Trump is being charged with a high crime. There is a witness with direct knowledge of Trump’s guilt or innocence and the Republicans will not allow him to testify, and they’re going to acquit the President. 

Thats what the public is going to remember. This will not be a “victory” for the Republicans. It’s a debacle. 
I think most people, including Republicans, realize what he did, but it's all baked into him being a questionable (being nice) character. I don't think this impacts his election changes one way or the other.

 
Their mistake was bringing a weak case to the Senate. They should have subpoenaed Bolton at the House level. Oh it's a victory now and probably in November
If we're being honest, their mistake was not believing what the GOP senators were saying.  I guess they thought the GOP was bluffing.  Not sure how many times they need to be shown that what you see is exactly what you get with the GOP these days.  Hopefully, one day they learn this and adjust accordingly.

This will be the first impeachment trial ever in our US history that doesn't have any witnesses and/or additional testimony as part of the "trial".  We need to pause and think about that.  Then we can pause and think about the precedent that's been set.

 
I think most people, including Republicans, realize what he did, but it's all baked into him being a questionable (being nice) character. I don't think this impacts his election changes one way or the other.
I don't.  I am absolutely confident Trump himself still doesn't get it.  We've gone from "perfect" to "he did it but it's no big deal" with everyone being dragged kicking and screaming through the goalpost shifts.

 
Their mistake was bringing a weak case to the Senate. They should have subpoenaed Bolton at the House level. Oh it's a victory now and probably in November
So weak that even Lamar admitted it happened?  And the more details that come out...show it may even be worse than what the House charged him with?

Bolton refused...and we are still waiting in testimony to make it through the courts from before all of this

 
I guess Sekulow isn't happy with the cross-examination of witnesses done by Nunes, Jordan, Collins, etc.  

 
So if I'm crunching the numbers correctly, 53 people are refusing to do what approximately 245.4 million people want them to do. That seems like a gross imbalance of power and refusal to do what their bosses want them to do.

 
The Republicans have set several precedents in this impeachment trial that I'm sure they're going to regret and whine about later, when being used by the Democrats.
This is guaranteed.  

Outside of this particular precedent, think about the reaction to a President with a (D) by their name declaring national emergency and initiating severe climate change penalties for offenders or declaring national emergency at the border and dumping resources into helping people get processed.  The options are endless.

 
So if I'm crunching the numbers correctly, 53 people are refusing to do what approximately 245.4 million people want them to do. That seems like a gross imbalance of power and refusal to do what their bosses want them to do.
Not really much of a Democracy when the power comes not from voters but on how much land you control. 

 
I stated months ago the only possible way the Dems lose in November is if they blow it themselves.  It is getting blown.  Now we know why Pelosi was against this.  It has turned into another debacle.

 
The Republicans have set several precedents in this impeachment trial that I'm sure they're going to regret and whine about later, when being used by the Democrats.
Maybe. But I honestly wonder how many more impeachments we're going to see. I also wonder (and this first occurred to me 20 years ago during the Clinton impeachment) if Nixon didn't make a mistake by listening to Barry Goldwater.

Consider: 67 votes to remove a President. What is the largest majority any single party has had: 59? 60? And that's really rare. Almost impossible. Usually the max is about what we have now: 53-55. Which means, assuming one party is 100% behind you, you need a dozen members of the President's own party to agree to a removal. The odds against this, even for an obvious crime (and it's hard to find a more obvious crime than this one) seem pretty high. Because what this impeachment has shown us is that when the crime is obvious, the President can obstruct justice, refuse witnesses and evidence to the House, and then the Senate can blame the House for insufficient evidence.

.

 
Some Republicans, even while acknowledging that Trump did what he was being accused of, says he should not be removed from office. 

Is it possible to be found guilty of the accusations, but disagree on the penalty? Granted, a censure or some other argument is essentially a punish-less penalty, but is it fair to think the punishment is also excessive?
It's not a punishment.  It's preventing the continued abuse of power. If you believe he's guilty, how can you possibly let him remain in office? 

 
Some Republicans, even while acknowledging that Trump did what he was being accused of, says he should not be removed from office. 

Is it possible to be found guilty of the accusations, but disagree on the penalty? Granted, a censure or some other argument is essentially a punish-less penalty, but is it fair to think the punishment is also excessive?
I certainly can imagine this being a reasonable position in other contexts, but in this case the goalposts that we started with are nowhere near the goalposts we ended with.

 
Imagine how absolutely bonkers certain people will be if somebody like Bernie Sanders gets to be POTUS with the free rein Trump was given.  
Yeah, right. If Sanders wins, Republicans will immediately accuse him of abusing power, acting like a king, wearing a tan suit, etc., etc. -- all with a completely straight face. There was no precedent set today, except one that involves a Republican President and a Republican Senate.

 
I also like how Trump supporters like to forget he won the election by around 100k votes in 3 states 4 years ago and 2018 mid-terms never happen. 

 
The Republicans have set several precedents in this impeachment trial that I'm sure they're going to regret and whine about later, when being used by the Democrats.
All this will be brushed away like tears in the rain. And a compliant press will enable it. 

 
I also like how Trump supporters like to forget he won the election by around 100k votes in 3 states 4 years ago and 2018 mid-terms never happen. 
He basically won on a technicality. But lamenting the past isn't going to change anything. We need to avoid repeating this mistake and find a good candidate, and honestly, I'm over having to choose between old white guys.

 
Not sure the focus should be so much on the presidency as the senate.

If we had a constitutionally functioning senate, the presidency situation would've worked itself out already.

Vote in a reasonable president and put them under the oversight of a sane/constitutional congress, and you have a good combo.  Even a great president having to deal with an insane congress is basically pointless.

 
Not sure the focus should be so much on the presidency as the senate.

If we had a constitutionally functioning senate, the presidency situation would've worked itself out already.

Vote in a reasonable president and put them under the oversight of a sane/constitutional congress, and you have a good combo.  Even a great president having to deal with an insane congress is basically pointless.
Pretty tall order when North and South Dakota got California doubled up. Tyranny of the minority. 

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top