Countdown Clock to Trumps impeachment " STARTS"
POSTED BY: THGRRI
UPDATED: Monday, April 14, 2025 23:28
VIEWED: 485499
PAGE 381 of 404
Yanno my signature line about Biden* - And when Biden* fails to keep his promises - or even promote them - I'll be happy to laugh at his skinny saggy ass parading all over town in his New Clothes™. ...
That's how you can tell if a President is really behind their rhetoric, IF THEY WRANGLE AND STUMP TO MAKE IT HAPPEN.
Obama kept his dirty shit on the DL as much as he kept his failure to get behind his rhetorical treaties on the DL - though their signings were with much fanfare as meaningless as they were.
Obama didn't campaign for them, even though he was happy to take credit for meaningless gestures.
And btw, democrats would have ended up in a MUCH better position in the midterms if Obama had tried the littlest bit to make the "change" portion of his slogan real, and held the banks and loan institutions accountable. Instead he shoveled trillions at them and rewarded them most generously for their bad behavior.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Tomorrow Trumps second impeachment trial starts. I'm so excited!
T
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
No shit, huh.
We know dude. You keep jerking off about it all the time.
*yawn*
--------------------------------------------------
A government is a body of people usually, notably, governed by Mark Zuckerborg and Slack Dorsey. 
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Trump’s lawyers submitted a 78-page trial brief to the Senate, arguing that it is unconstitutional to try a former president on articles of impeachment, that Trump’s speech at the January 6 rally urging his supporters to “fight” was rhetorical, and that the former president was well within his First Amendment rights to speak as he did. It blames the attack on the Capitol not on Trump’s incitement of violence over time — as the article of impeachment does — but on “a small group of criminals.”
The document seems designed to appeal to an audience of one: Trump himself. It repeatedly uses “Democrat” as a derogatory adjective, accusing “Democrat members” of Congress of “Trump Derangement Syndrome.” It calls the House impeachment managers intellectually dishonest and fact free. Curiously, in what is perhaps a nod either to his vanity or to the QAnon believers who think Trump is still president, it never acknowledges him as a former president, repeatedly referring to him simply as “the 45th President.”
This document tries to rewrite what we all saw with our own eyes. It will not convince anyone who has been paying attention to what happened on January 6, but that’s clearly not its purpose. Instead, it reinforces the narrative that Trump has been persecuted by his enemies, and that he was not responsible.
More at https://heathercoxrichardson.substack.com/p/february-8-2021
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by second:
It repeatedly uses “Democrat” as a derogatory adjective, accusing “Democrat members” of Congress of “Trump Derangement Syndrome.”
Maybe somebody should count the dozens or possibly hundreds of times you've used the term Trumptard just since Biden* took office.
--------------------------------------------------
A government is a body of people usually, notably, governed by Mark Zuckerborg and Slack Dorsey.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:If you dislike Trumptard, would you prefer legal documents filed in court to use the descriptive term "fathead fucking lying sacks of shit" which would technically be more accurate?
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:Quote:
Originally posted by second:
It repeatedly uses “Democrat” as a derogatory adjective, accusing “Democrat members” of Congress of “Trump Derangement Syndrome.”
Maybe somebody should count the dozens or possibly hundreds of times you've used the term Trumptard just since Biden* took office.
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
The trial will kick off with a four-hour debate on the constitutionality of the proceeding followed by a vote at a simple majority threshold to affirm the proceedings' constitutionality.
https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/trump-impeachment-trial-02-09-2
021/h_17792f7a426647b79eac193633ee7812
It is constitutional:
1 https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/LSB/LSB10565
2 https://www.lawfareblog.com/constitutionality-trying-former-president-
impeached-while-office
3 https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/02/04/yes-senate-has-powe
r-try-trump-he-was-impeached-office/
How many Republican Senators will deny it? We will know later today.
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by second:Quote:If you dislike Trumptard, would you prefer legal documents filed in court to use the descriptive term "fathead fucking lying sacks of shit" which would technically be more accurate?
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:Quote:
Originally posted by second:
It repeatedly uses “Democrat” as a derogatory adjective, accusing “Democrat members” of Congress of “Trump Derangement Syndrome.”
Maybe somebody should count the dozens or possibly hundreds of times you've used the term Trumptard just since Biden* took office.
Dude. I don't care what names you want to call me.
To take offense at anything anybody has to say, I would first have to have even just the smallest bit of respect for that person or their opinions.
I have no respect for you. I have no respect for your opinions.
Be awful at your own discretion. I couldn't possibly care any less.
--------------------------------------------------
A government is a body of people usually, notably, governed by Mark Zuckerborg and Slack Dorsey.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Republican Senator from Louisiana explains that it is Constitutional to impeach Trump.
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Trump Claims My Research Supports His Case Against Impeachment
He’s Wrong. By Brian Kalt
FEB 09, 2021
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2021/02/trump-late-impeachment-bri
ef-research-wrong.html
Back in 2001, I wrote a long law review article exploring an abstract question: Can Congress impeach and try ex-officials for their misconduct in office? The issue of what I labeled “late impeachment” was just a hypothetical back then. It was still only a hypothetical when I wrote a book on weird presidential constitutional issues in 2012 and included a chapter on impeaching ex-presidents. Then last month … well, you know.
When it became clear that Donald Trump’s impeachment trial would not begin until after his term ended, I knew my old work would come in handy for both the House managers and Trump’s lawyers. I had concluded in my article that, on balance, the evidence solidly favored late impeachability. But late impeachment is a complicated issue, with a lot of evidence and arguments on both sides—and my article tried to present all of it (it ended up being 124 pages long).
Sure enough, the House managers cited the article numerous times in their brief. So did Trump’s lawyers in their brief. Trump’s lawyers focused their attention on the parts of my article that favored their side, and not the parts—including my overall conclusions—that favored late impeachability. Fair enough—their job is to advocate for Trump, not for me. But as I looked more closely at just how they depicted my work, it was clear that there was a problem.
In several places, they cited me as though I had concluded something when in fact I had concluded the opposite. For instance, they said:
The only purpose of impeachment is to remove the President, Vice-President, and civil officers from office. When a President is no longer in office, the objective of an impeachment ceases. (Kalt at 66.)
So what did I say on Page 66? In that section, I looked at some different ways to interpret the constitutional text. One such way, which I called “Interpretation #3,” was consistent with what Trump’s lawyers were citing me for. But after summing up Interpretation #3, I denigrated it, saying that it had “deep flaws.” More to the point, one of its flaws was that removal “is not the sole end of impeachment.” In other words, I said the exact opposite of the proposition for which they cited me.
Legal citations use something called “signals.” . . . explanation of signals . . . For Trump’s lawyers to cite me without a signal for something that did not support their proposition—let alone support it directly—was a breach of professional standards.
More at https://web.archive.org/web/20210210002037/https://slate.com/news-and-
politics/2021/02/trump-late-impeachment-brief-research-wrong.html
When lawyers quote the wrong people and cite sources for the opposite of what those sources actually say, it is never a good sign. Judges hate that. It makes their jobs harder. How senators feel about it is less clear.
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME