|
Post by epaul on Oct 23, 2019 17:17:53 GMT -5
Alan, Were you upset in 2016 when Mitch McConnel held a closed-door meeting with Republicans sitting on the Senate Judiciary Committee wherein all 11 GOP panel members subsequently signed a letter pledging not to hold hearings on any Supreme Court replacement for Scalia until a new president is inaugurated? Did the folks in your red state recommend "hold the vote" at that point? I doubt they do. But, you do and it still rankles, apparently. Well, multiply that rankling by ten (or two and a half, I don't care) as this is concerning the president. I will now quote Lar as he may have just hit at least one of the nails right on the head: Now I will needlessly paraphrase Lar. The tell above is the word "seem". Yes, the D's have the right and the reason to do it way they are, but the way they are doing it, with closed doors and convenient leaks, "seems" like dirty pool and a snow job to a significant portion of the population. A minority, true, but a flashing "trouble ahead" sign if the good of the whole is to be considered. Memories of being screwed last a long time, even if you weren't. See, the trouble with keeping portions of this behind closed doors at this point is it allows the radio stations serving "the other side" to make up whatever shit they want to fill in the gaps. And they are doing exactly that. The D's are facilitating the Trump's main defense out in the land, radio confusion and the inkling of partisan-based unfairness and skulduggery. Open it all up for the good of the whole country, even if it isn't the best strategery. This impeachment business is apparently a big deal in this country, almost as big as NFL football, if the ratings are to be believed (I know, I find it hard to believe, as well, but polling has it within 12 rating points and an audience share of close to 12%)
|
|
|
Post by epaul on Oct 23, 2019 17:24:39 GMT -5
Or, as my wife says whenever I leave the house without a shirt on, "appearances matter".
(put a fucking shirt on, you slob!)
|
|
|
Post by david on Oct 23, 2019 18:21:32 GMT -5
Paul, I am not taking the dems' side, I just get tired of each party saying that they other is ruining America with their dirty tactics, when the accusing party used the same tactics when they were in power. And now we have the junior high theatrics of "storming the door" so some ass can get in front of a camera and stir emotions. In this instance, we have an ambassador that has served under both parties giving us his take on what occurred. His credentials indicate to me that he is a well intentioned, neutral party. The only knock I have seen against him is that Trump supporters do not like what he has to say. As to the "closed door" trend, I think that this February 2018 article is enlightening: www.usnews.com/news/the-report/articles/2018-02-07/congress-has-turned-into-a-secret-society
|
|
|
Post by AlanC on Oct 23, 2019 18:22:51 GMT -5
"Alan, Were you upset in 2016 when Mitch McConnel held a closed-door meeting with Republicans sitting on the Senate Judiciary Committee wherein all 11 GOP panel members subsequently signed a letter pledging not to hold hearings on any Supreme Court replacement for Scalia until a new president is inaugurated? Did the folks in your red state recommend "hold the vote" at that point?"
Upset, no. Recognize it for a Machiavellian "Because we can" move, yes.
Like I said hypocrisy abounds on both sides. I don't like the "It's secret- except for what I want to leak to WaPo". That is a similar "Because we can" move. Like Lar said, they are seeking to remove the POTUS- whom millions of people voted for. It's kinda a BFD.
Lar said the secret meetings are to keep witnesses from collaborating their testimony. Hmmm, maybe. I don't think that is the whole story but I will let it go for now.
Let's talk a little more "were you upset". This one is about election "meddling". Trump has been beat across the head and shoulders about that for the last two years. But the people doing the beating didn't seem to care when Wasserman-Shultz and the DNC rigged the game against Bernie. They didn't- and don't- care that Clinton associates paid for a smear job- that ironically came from Russians- to try to derail DT and later used to obtain FISA warrants to spy upon the President. That is election meddling too.
I could go on and on with the "whataboutisms" but I'm calm now and wish to retire from the contest again.
I'm going to work on my equanimity and genuflecting.
|
|
|
Post by casualplayerpaul on Oct 23, 2019 18:41:38 GMT -5
Committee meetings on sensitive matters being closed to committee members only is SOP. The whistleblower followed Federal Law and is protected by that same law. Also, a non-factor, since everything he or she said has turned out to be acknowledged by POTUS and his people. I believe that the President can answer questions posed by Congress anytime he like. The suggestion that this impeachment is in anyway not Kosher? Please how this impeachment process is any different than Bill Clinton not being able to cross-examine Linda Tripp? "The impeachment of Bill Clinton was initiated on October 8, 1998, when the United States House of Representatives voted to commence impeachment proceedings against Bill Clinton, 42nd president of the United States, for "high crimes and misdemeanors", which were subsequently detailed in two articles of impeachment." So when are the Democrats going to grow some stones and vote to initiate impeachment proceedings? That's when it stops being a partisan kangaroo court and achieves kosher-ness. Or do they just want to keep up this useless show? There have been three impeachments (Nixon never got that far) in US history. There is no blueprint. There is no generally accepted procedure. Sorry, but things are not looking good for your boy, and how the House is proceeding has nothing to do with that. Pelosi and the facts, not parliamentary procedure, have Donnie's you-know-whats is a vice. The fact that the right is arguing about the process as opposed to the facts is a bad omen for Trump.
|
|
|
Post by aquaduct on Oct 23, 2019 18:51:35 GMT -5
"The impeachment of Bill Clinton was initiated on October 8, 1998, when the United States House of Representatives voted to commence impeachment proceedings against Bill Clinton, 42nd president of the United States, for "high crimes and misdemeanors", which were subsequently detailed in two articles of impeachment." So when are the Democrats going to grow some stones and vote to initiate impeachment proceedings? That's when it stops being a partisan kangaroo court and achieves kosher-ness. Or do they just want to keep up this useless show? There have been three impeachments (Nixon never got that far) in US history. There is no blueprint. There is no generally accepted procedure. Sorry, but things are not looking good for your boy, and how the House is proceeding has nothing to do with that. Pelosi and the facts, not parliamentary procedure, have Donnie's you-know-whats is a vice. The fact that the right is arguing about the process as opposed to the facts is a bad omen for Trump. OK, if you say so. Just strikes me as cowardly to not go out and show what you've got. And if I've learned anything in life,it's that cowardice has a nasty tendency to backfire. Anyway, wring your hands and rend your prayer cloth. I ain't seeing nothing to get worked up about.
|
|
|
Post by millring on Oct 23, 2019 19:24:37 GMT -5
I really do wonder how views might change if the national press were 85% Republican instead of 85% Democrat. Can you make yourself imagine it?
For myself, I'm guessing I would simply dismiss it as "Well, duh. They're 85% that way because they accept what's true." And I'm guessing that why the Democrats don't see it as a strange anomaly. "Of course the press is 85% Democrat. They accept what's true."
Still weird, I say.
The party that says it wants diversity and promotes affirmative action isn't bothered a wit by a press that votes 85% Democrat.
|
|
|
Post by jdd2 on Oct 23, 2019 19:28:33 GMT -5
Good thing they don't cover potters/pottery, eh?
|
|
|
Post by epaul on Oct 23, 2019 19:28:44 GMT -5
Look Dave, the jig is up. Mr. Solid, Fair, Clean, Responsible, Civic-Minded Lawyer Dude? Ha! Mike spilled the beans on Facebook. You have Karma Chameleon as your ring tone, watch roller derby every Saturday morning in your underwear, and were the role model for that "Better Call, Saul" guy. (bet it killed you they just didn't give you the you part). Come clean, Mr. Better Call David.
|
|
|
Post by epaul on Oct 23, 2019 19:30:18 GMT -5
Come to think of it, would you have any interest in joining our Duck Band? You'd fit right in. So far, it's just Todd, Dave, Don, and myself. But, we could use one more dancer. Todd keeps getting arrested.
(costume malfunctions, he says. ya, you bet.)
|
|
|
Post by Rob Hanesworth on Oct 23, 2019 19:31:34 GMT -5
“ Hold the damn vote and get it out in the open! WTFH are they doing behind those closed doors? ” Gathering evidence. By the way, Republicans are in the room also, and able to ask any questions they like. So far, it appears you guys just don’t put like the answers, so you all are having a hissy fit. When/if the impeachment trial actually happens, it will be in the open House and televised. Right now the committee process is happening, and no, Trump doesn’t have a right to confront anyone, at this point. Which is why he appears to be in full panic mode. Mike I don't think it's proceeding as fairly as you are describing it. I could give more specifics about why I don't like the process (i.e. my hissy fit) but tell me, oh wise one, since you know so much about it... why behind closed doors? So it's a committee? They are normally public. It's the "Peoples House". Why behind closed doors and the restriction to the so-called "evidence"? I know what I think and I'm sure it's 180 degrees from you so... why? Nothing being discussed is top secret or classified. What's the reason that even members of Congress don't have access? They have to read what Schiff leaks to his lapdogs to know what is happening.
|
|
|
Post by casualplayerpaul on Oct 23, 2019 20:39:21 GMT -5
There have been three impeachments (Nixon never got that far) in US history. There is no blueprint. There is no generally accepted procedure. Sorry, but things are not looking good for your boy, and how the House is proceeding has nothing to do with that. Pelosi and the facts, not parliamentary procedure, have Donnie's you-know-whats is a vice. The fact that the right is arguing about the process as opposed to the facts is a bad omen for Trump. OK, if you say so. Just strikes me as cowardly to not go out and show what you've got. And if I've learned anything in life,it's that cowardice has a nasty tendency to backfire. Anyway, wring your hands and rend your prayer cloth. I ain't seeing nothing to get worked up about. Denying aid to an ally by withholding aid authorized by Congress unless they produce dirt on the President’s political adversary is nothing to get worked up about. OK, if you say so.
|
|
|
Post by david on Oct 23, 2019 22:30:47 GMT -5
Come to think of it, would you have any interest in joining our Duck Band? You'd fit right in. So far, it's just Todd, Dave, Don, and myself. But, we could use one more dancer. Todd keeps g betetting arrested. (costume malfunctions, he says. ya, you bet.) That is a handsome offer, but there might be sides of Todd I don't want to see. You Midwest guys are a bit wild for my taste. "Betetting" is not something I want to be part of. Most of my dance moves have left me, but after exhaustive research, I have developed a new one I call the "play opossum."
|
|
|
Post by david on Oct 23, 2019 22:33:28 GMT -5
I can teach you the dance if you are patient.
|
|
|
Post by patrick on Oct 23, 2019 22:43:30 GMT -5
The argument that there are always quid pro quo's in the governments dealings, and therefore Trump did nothing wrong in holding up the military aid to get dirt on the Bidens is nonsense. It depends on the quo's and who's getting them.
I spent over 20 years negotiating contracts for the Federal government. Of course there are quid pro quo's, the exchange of two things of value is pretty much the definition of a contract.
If I tell a company that, on my authority as a Federal official I will cause the government to provide this QUID to your corporation, and in return your corporation will provide the government that QUO, that's entirely appropriate.
If I tell a company that, on my authority as a Federal official I will cause the government to provide this QUID to your corporation, and in return your corporation will place $50,000 in a bank account I keep in the Cayman Islands under a false name, that's totally different.
Trump held up appropriated funds to demand that Ukraine give his election campaign dirt on his political opponent. That was not provided to the Federal government for any legitimate government purpose, it was purely for his own political benefit.
|
|
|
Post by patrick on Oct 23, 2019 22:52:34 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by epaul on Oct 23, 2019 22:58:09 GMT -5
... If I tell a company that, on my authority as a Federal official I will cause the government to provide this QUID to your corporation, and in return your corporation will place $50,000 in a bank account I keep in the Cayman Islands under a false name, that's totally different. Say... Just how exactly did you end up with this boat again? I know you said it was from selling magazine subscriptions, but ... Really?
|
|
|
Post by patrick on Oct 24, 2019 8:06:46 GMT -5
... If I tell a company that, on my authority as a Federal official I will cause the government to provide this QUID to your corporation, and in return your corporation will place $50,000 in a bank account I keep in the Cayman Islands under a false name, that's totally different. Say... Just how exactly did you end up with this boat again? I know you said it was from selling magazine subscriptions, but ... Really? I was inspired by Jeff. I built that myself in my garage.
|
|
|
Post by dradtke on Oct 24, 2019 8:30:06 GMT -5
Come to think of it, would you have any interest in joining our Duck Band? You'd fit right in. So far, it's just Todd, Dave, Don, and myself. But, we could use one more dancer. Todd keeps g betetting arrested. (costume malfunctions, he says. ya, you bet.) That is a handsome offer, but there might be sides of Todd I don't want to see. You Midwest guys are a bit wild for my taste. "Betetting" is not something I want to be part of. Most of my dance moves have left me, but after exhaustive research, I have developed a new one I call the "play opossum." So far we haven't played Opossum, but if you hum a few bars we can fake it. As long as it's in G.
|
|
|
Post by brucemacneill on Oct 24, 2019 8:49:26 GMT -5
Glad this thread got down to real problems now.
|
|