The Z Machine
Footballguy
Edge cases, bruh, edge cases.Hence the mad genius of the programmers. They’re clearly stretching the boundaries to find the breaking point. Genius.
Edge cases, bruh, edge cases.Hence the mad genius of the programmers. They’re clearly stretching the boundaries to find the breaking point. Genius.
Seems like it would do the opposite.The thong bikini was invented by an Austrian in the United States at the beginning of WWII. I hypothesize that it was a weapon intended to distract this country and keep us from entering the coming war.
What is so magical about this one year cutofff? And somehow I wonder this excuse of timing would be used regardless of when an impeachment occurred.Maybe letting the voters decide with less than a year to go.
The Democrats had no choice. Trump committed an impeachable crime.And the law of unintended consequences biting the Dems in the ###. Maybe letting the voters decide with less than a year to go.
The moderate dems hand over reigns of leadership to the far left.
Oh, so close! Do you want to see Bolton testify? Why do you think the Republicans are fighting it?Has Bolton testified or have we seen manuscript yet. Until either happens it’s hersey.
Good posting except for the fact that Bernie is a much better candidate than a guy who is running in slo motion. Trump would be torpedoing himself by taking out Biden.I still think the whole Hunter Biden thing is a ruse. But if they do call him, then the Senate will be doing exactly what Trump was impeached for: using a fake scandal to try and bring down the Bidens.
And assuming Trump is acquitted, and the Hunter Biden thing hurts his dad just enough to make Bernie the nominee and Trump is then re-elected, this whole thing becomes mission accomplished for Donald Trump.
Unless you are nipping at the bait to keep him trolling so he gets banned, why are you engaging?Oh, so close! Do you want to see Bolton testify? Why do you think the Republicans are fighting it?
Lol. I'm trying to keep him trolling? I'm not going to comment on his posting style. It's against the rules. Keep it on topic please.Unless you are nipping at the bait to keep him trolling so he gets banned, why are you engaging?
That article is wrong. The Democrats tried to pass an amendment to the impeachment rules so that Roberts would determine the relevancy of evidence but the Republicans voted it down. The Senate votes on the subpoenas.I read a WSJ opinion the other day that argued that there is actually no vote required, and that it was within Roberts' purview to call witnesses. I'll see if I can dig it up.
Edit: It was nytimes. Here it is
I agree, although one could argue that the Trump supporters capable of engaging in discussion have been run off leaving the ones who don't.Lol. I'm trying to keep him trolling? I'm not going to comment on his posting style. It's against the rules. Keep it on topic please.
There are some who complain that Trump supporters can't post here. This is a prime example of why it can nearly impossible to have an honest conversation. Stlrams, I mean.
We all knew we'd get here eventually. The retreat to this point was inevitable.So we are back to “get over it”?
Yes let’s hear what he has to say or at least get the manuscript rather then relying on what the media says via their anonymous sources that everyone loves to run with..Oh, so close! Do you want to see Bolton testify? Why do you think the Republicans are fighting it?
What ever happened to that banner. I mean I know they could make up another to have him stand in front of it but it would not be as compelling as having the original. A piece of Americana like that hopefully has been preserved, maybe in the Smithsonian.I still think the whole Hunter Biden thing is a ruse. But if they do call him, then the Senate will be doing exactly what Trump was impeached for: using a fake scandal to try and bring down the Bidens.
And assuming Trump is acquitted, and the Hunter Biden thing hurts his dad just enough to make Bernie the nominee and Trump is then re-elected, this whole thing becomes mission accomplished for Donald Trump.
I am starting to wonder about how much more we can get out of Bolton if he repeats that the President told him the aid was held back until Ukraine started an investigation into the Bidens. It could be a bit of “we already know that from the NYT article, what else do you have to say?” And if the only way is to get this is to make it is a kangaroo court about the Bidens, I don’t like it.Honestly the damage is done already. Just the fact that anyone knows about Hunter Biden means that it worked. There doesn’t need to be legitimate investigation for Trump to create the doubt that he needs. The goal is to make it a repeat of 2016 and make the average voter chose the lesser of two evils and I think they’ve already done that if Biden is the nominee.
If there’s an offer of witness swap, they should take it. What Bolton has to say is likely worth it.
Ah, I found my answer. The Bush Presidential Library.What ever happened to that banner. I mean I know they could make up another to have him stand in front of it but it would not be as compelling as having the original. A piece of Americana like that hopefully has been preserved, maybe in the Smithsonian.
A curious decision to not have people who could exonerate oneself testify in their defense.President Trump’s tweets these morning seem to indicate that, given the choice, he would prefer not to have witnesses.
My LinkWhat ever happened to that banner. I mean I know they could make up another to have him stand in front of it but it would not be as compelling as having the original. A piece of Americana like that hopefully has been preserved, maybe in the Smithsonian.
Several have testified corroborating what we know of the leak so far.Has Bolton testified or have we seen manuscript yet. Until either happens it’s hersey.
You're right. Since the actual manuscript can't be provided, it's too bad there's no way to find out what Bolton actually knows and says. Somebody ought to invent some way to do that. Maybe we could even come up with a catchy name for it like "witness testimony">So no one can provide the actual manuscript.... shocking. It’s the piranhas of fbgs that smell blood....
NmPresident Trump’s tweets these morning seem to indicate that, given the choice, he would prefer not to have witnesses.
Maybe we let the voters decide against these senators...but the actions of the President aren't jsut those that you ignore and let the voters decide. As has been pointed out...that sets the precedent that in the last year and a half of a term that any president can do what they want...because, you know, we need to let the voters decide.And the law of unintended consequences biting the Dems in the ###. Maybe letting the voters decide with less than a year to go.
The moderate dems hand over reigns of leadership to the far left.
If the GOP would allow witnesses and honestly look at what aTrump did...the remedy would be removal. Because its coming to the point already that they admit he did what has been claimed.Oh. No he didnt. But sure he was impeached. Just not gonna be convicted. What's the remedy?
In this country its elections.
No choice in a political act. That's funny.
Less of a conflict of interest than Republican Senators who have accepted large campaign contributions from members of Trump's legal team.I wonder how the Democratic Presidential nominee candidates will vote in this trial with the person they're going to run against being the one they're voting to remove?
Conflict of interest? naw ,,,, pffffttttt they'll be impartial I bet
Is anyone in here saying just rely about what the media says?Yes let’s hear what he has to say or at least get the manuscript rather then relying on what the media says via their anonymous sources that everyone loves to run with..
For the first time since this all started, between yesterday and today, there’s about a 1% chance he does get removed. It’s still obviously very unlikely but it’s infinitely more likely than it was before the Bolton leaks when that chance was 0.Oh. No he didnt. But sure he was impeached. Just not gonna be convicted. What's the remedy?
In this country its elections.
No choice in a political act. That's funny.
If he isn’t barred from running in a separate but related vote.I heard on POTUS Radio that even if Trump is impeached he can still run again for POTUS as the Republican candidate. Is that correct?
Hershey? Heresy? Hearsay?Has Bolton testified or have we seen manuscript yet. Until either happens it’s hersey.
Now you see the miscalculation that led to the fall of the Reich.Seems like it would do the opposite.
Which is kind of funny given Graham now wants to see the manuscript. It's even more funny coming from Graham that he wants to see the manuscript but doesn't want the witnessesPresident Trump’s tweets these morning seem to indicate that, given the choice, he would prefer not to have witnesses.
I swear to God, I just read this post in Brick Tamland's voice from Anchorman and I can't stop giggling.Oh. No he didnt. But sure he was impeached. Just not gonna be convicted. What's the remedy?
In this country its elections.
No choice in a political act. That's funny.
He's already been impeached. If he's removed, he can't run for President again, but that's not going to happen. Not even worth discussing that scenario at this point.I heard on POTUS Radio that even if Trump is impeached he can still run again for POTUS as the Republican candidate. Is that correct?
801(d) Statements That Are Not Hearsay. A statement that meets the following conditions is not hearsay:Hershey? Heresy? Hearsay?
Assuming you mean the latter, hearsay testimony is very likely permitted in this sort of hearing.
And he wants to view the manuscript (which is going to be sold on Amazon) in a SCIF.Which is kind of funny given Graham now wants to see the manuscript. It's even more funny coming from Graham that he wants to see the manuscript but doesn't want the witnesses
And he wants to view the manuscript (which is going to be sold on Amazon) in a SCIF.Which is kind of funny given Graham now wants to see the manuscript. It's even more funny coming from Graham that he wants to see the manuscript but doesn't want the witnesses
Definitely not as bad for the country as a BJ, amirite?Oh. No he didnt. But sure he was impeached. Just not gonna be convicted. What's the remedy?
In this country its elections.
No choice in a political act. That's funny.
I realize Przybyla almost kills it but she does force Stefanik to step in and say yep that's the 'corruption' for Trump, it was Biden+Crowdstrike. Also let's face it Zeldin was about to go on a stemwinder with no content.https://twitter.com/nbcpolitics/status/1222295395679854592?s=21
This Q&A feels so familiar. Can’t quite figure it out.
She seemed to chime in when he wouldn't answer the question asked. It gets annoying...but at the same time, I wish more reporters would force the answers to what they are asking.I wish she would shut up and let them answer (or give non answers). Did the reporter ever stop talking?
Did you order the "code red"If we want a witness trade let’s get Biden and Trump in here and get it all figured out.
Yeah, all this “we don’t have the votes” stuff screams Lucy with the football to me.We all know there will be no witnesses.
In the long run, that will help the Democrats more than having them.We all know there will be no witnesses.
Interesting question. If he is removed from office before serving a full term does that count as a term in office or could he still serve two full terms in addition to the partial term he has served?If he isn’t barred from running in a separate but related vote.
Quick reference if you have it handy. Otherwise, obviously, I can look for myself.He's already been impeached. If he's removed, he can't run for President again, but that's not going to happen. Not even worth discussing that scenario at this point.
B.J.'s are fine. Perjuring oneself to deny a victim a rightful recovery, and doing so hoping the majesty of one's office will protect one from Court oversight when the court has already been somewhat deferential is another matter. It is a question of whether presidents are above the law and whether the courts are a co-equal branch of government.Definitely not as bad for the country as a BJ, amirite?
Can't run for another term if it means his total would be to serve more than 10 years per Constitution, if that still means anything.Interesting question. If he is removed from office before serving a full term does that count as a term in office or could he still serve two full terms in addition to the partial term he has served?