The precedent the GOP is setting

Smyrna · 2020-01-31T14:05:39.742Z

toreyj01:

Of course, but the only side purely partisan was the GOP. Some Dems voted against impeachment but not a single GOP member voted for it. Same with Clinton, some Dems voted against him. Which side is acting more partisan if this is true?

…and 50% of those saw it as so partisan, they changed parties.

westaussie · 2020-01-31T14:05:50.879Z

Most definitely the Republicans were absolutely and unequivocally partisan.

Smyrna · 2020-01-31T14:06:56.503Z

westaussie:

Most definitely the Republicans were absolutely and unequivocally partisan.

I’m sorry. You’ve proved to me that I don’t speak your dialect of the Australian language.

westaussie · 2020-01-31T14:10:27.588Z

I speak English.

Paul_Thomson · 2020-01-31T14:26:04.488Z

Jamerican:

… It’s obvious that the senate republicans are cowards and value power over principle.

It isn’t obvious at all. There are several possible explanations for the pending vote outcome. Some of them impugn those leaning towards requesting witnesses, and some impugn those seeking to disallow witnesses.

Paul_Thomson · 2020-01-31T15:28:34.498Z

toreyj01:

Smyrna:

toreyj01:

Yes, along with the fact that he was impeached by the House.

…and yet, not one single R voted this way. Seems the impeachment was rather partisan, wouldn’t you agree?

Of course, but the only side purely partisan was the GOP. Some Dems voted against impeachment but not a single GOP member voted for it. Same with Clinton, some Dems voted against him. Which side is acting more partisan if this is true?

Your post is a result of your leftist allegiance to quantities (ratios) over quality ( truth).

You think that a diversity of outcomes proves virtue and unprejudiced inputs, and a uniformity of outcomes proves collusion and prejudice. It could, however, be that this uniformity of outcome is a result of only one outcome being true, and the best quality result being chosen by all in that one group. The dissenters in the diverse group may simply be refusing to bow to demands of prejudice made by the rest of their group and be choosing truth over expediency.

Camp · 2020-01-31T15:36:11.316Z

You have found why global corporations and global anything is so unpopular.

There is insufficient legal remedies for wrongs.

There is no chance to find a system that would be acceptable to such diverse regions as Russia, China, NK, Canada, Iran, USA, and Saudi Arabia.

Better to simply Keep America Great and hope others emulate

Feel free to use this slogan!!

westaussie · 2020-01-31T16:01:52.104Z

Why did you omit an entire continent in your post?

Camp · 2020-01-31T16:26:59.727Z

Antarctica is too sparsely populated.

Keep America Great and Hope Others Emulate!

westaussie · 2020-01-31T16:31:12.755Z

Try again.

toreyj01 · 2020-01-31T17:32:42.438Z

Paul_Thomson:

toreyj01:

Smyrna:

toreyj01:

Yes, along with the fact that he was impeached by the House.

…and yet, not one single R voted this way. Seems the impeachment was rather partisan, wouldn’t you agree?

Of course, but the only side purely partisan was the GOP. Some Dems voted against impeachment but not a single GOP member voted for it. Same with Clinton, some Dems voted against him. Which side is acting more partisan if this is true?

Your post is a result of your leftist allegiance to quantities (ratios) over quality ( truth).

You think that a diversity of outcomes proves virtue and unprejudiced inputs, and a uniformity of outcomes proves collusion and prejudice. It could, however, be that this uniformity of outcome is a result of only one outcome being true, and the best quality result being chosen by all in that one group. The dissenters in the diverse group may simply be refusing to bow to demands of prejudice made by the rest of their group and be choosing truth over expediency.

You can certainly argue that, but you forget Justin Amash. Elected to Congress as a Republican this cycle. He spoke out against the President and even called for his impeachment and was summarily hounded out of the party.

Had he remained in the GOP he certainly would have made the vote bipartisan.

I would also like to point out that every single time a GOP member talked against the President they were quickly rebutted or rebuked by either the President or one of his enforcers. Even Matt Gaetz fell victim to this when he spoke out about the raid on Sulemani.

Let’s face it, from all accounts the President is hated by the GOP in the House and Senate for the most part. If the votes were confidential there are many that would vote against him but they dare not voice their concerns publicly for fear of retribution.

Paul_Thomson · 2020-01-31T23:51:54.273Z

toreyj01:

Let’s face it, from all accounts the President is hated by the GOP in the House and Senate for the most part. If the votes were confidential there are many that would vote against him but they dare not voice their concerns publicly for fear of retribution.

You can face that. I’ll face the truth instead.

Weedhopper · 2020-02-01T00:06:40.915Z

If Trump was a dictator, every sick Democrat that supported funding the Steele dossier so Obama could spy illegally on Americans would be rounded up and sent to Gitmo for treason!

JayJay · 2020-02-01T00:09:36.938Z

DougBH:

Covfefe:

DougBH:

Forget the secret part, that didn’t happen.

Yeah it did. Literally the WB forced the phone call’s release.

How did the whistleblower find out about the call?

Someone who was in the call came and told him about it.

If that never happens we don’t know about it.

So now you’re going to redefine “secret” to mean only those things Trump knows he did?

JayJay · 2020-02-01T00:10:39.296Z

Paul_Thomson:

toreyj01:

Let’s face it, from all accounts the President is hated by the GOP in the House and Senate for the most part. If the votes were confidential there are many that would vote against him but they dare not voice their concerns publicly for fear of retribution.

You can face that. I’ll face the truth instead.

Torey is telling the truth.

DougBH · 2020-02-01T00:12:36.375Z

JayJay:

DougBH:

Covfefe:

DougBH:

Forget the secret part, that didn’t happen.

Yeah it did. Literally the WB forced the phone call’s release.

How did the whistleblower find out about the call?

Someone who was in the call came and told him about it.

If that never happens we don’t know about it.

So now you’re going to redefine “secret” to mean only those things Trump knows he did?

Are you saying Trump told the whistleblower? Nah…much more likely it was Vindeman. And why would people like Vindeman be allowed in a top secret operation that only the conspirators were supposed to be in on?
NO, it was not a secret.

JayJay · 2020-02-01T00:13:41.554Z

Because if he’s kept out he probably leaks that.

Trump does not have such control of the government that he can shut everybody out.

Everyone knows what “secret” means here. Without the whistleblower, no one here finds out about this.

DougBH · 2020-02-01T00:18:05.761Z

Weedhopper:

If Trump was a dictator, every sick Democrat that supported funding the Steele dossier so Obama could spy illegally on Americans would be rounded up and sent to Gitmo for treason!

If you want a threat to democracy, I would suggest the person who said the following:
“The president’s misconduct cannot be decided at the ballot box, for we cannot be assured that the vote will be fairly won.”

WuWei · 2020-02-01T01:09:23.174Z

JayJay:

Because if he’s kept out he probably leaks that.

Trump does not have such control of the government that he can shut everybody out.

Everyone knows what “secret” means here. Without the whistleblower, no one here finds out about this.

They should have let Trump get his announcement.

Oldandtired · 2020-02-01T01:43:41.922Z

Except we have found out how nonpartisan the DOJ is.
Remember all the lying the DOJ has been doing?
Who would trust them to do a fair and honest investigation?
So now who do we trust to do the job?