• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
  • We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Status
Not open for further replies.

RoKKeR

Member
Oct 25, 2017
15,472
As we learnt from reactions to Mueller, it's a key difference that he did that as a candidate. This was as President in the oval office.

As candidate he has no oath of office to uphold. He isn't acting as president.
All very true, just playing devil's advocate. Curious to see if there's any more there there on this particular story.
 

Buckle

Member
Oct 27, 2017
41,293
What are the chances that Trump could actually be surgically removed like a cancerous tumour?

I was under the assumption republicans controlling the senate would make a successful impeachment impossible in the end.

They've abused the law and backed Trump so far across every other terrifying thing he's done, what is different this time?
 

Fenderputty

Member
Jan 15, 2018
161
I dont think Trump is curious about the universe to even care about such. Heck he's probably not even curious about anything beyond his real estate properties on earth. He could care less if there was life elsewhere or other cosmic secrets.

Besides, it's extremely doubtful US Airforce will let Trump in on that big of a secret, knowing full well he will blurt it out his ass to Kremlin as soon as he gets inside his limo.

you never know ... he's probably extorting little green men.
 

devSin

Member
Oct 27, 2017
6,198
Most voters didn't get what they wanted.
Small comfort when we end up back here in 1, 4, or 8 (at best) years.

Maybe that's enough for you, but it isn't for me. The country showed itself for what it truly is, and simply punishing Trump and patting ourselves on the back for a job well done isn't going to wipe that away.
 

nomster

Member
Oct 27, 2017
763
What are the chances that Trump could actually be surgically removed like a cancerous tumour?

I was under the assumption republicans controlling the senate would make a successful impeachment impossible in the end.

They've abused the law and backed Trump so far across every other terrifying thing he's done, what is different this time?
I was thinking about this today and I think there is a small chance they'd makes the move if public sentiment drops so low that even appointing a judge becomes politically risky. At some point I think they might prefer to take their lumps with Pence, protect a small senate majority, and spend the next four years whining on TV. I think they prefer being out of power.
 

DinosaurusRex

Member
Oct 26, 2017
5,953
I'm trying to imagine a scenario where someone knew this miss-classification practice was regularly occurring, that it was wrong, contained damning information, but that they didn't think about disclosing it until the Ukraine whistleblower stuff.

"Oh shit, this is illegal? They've been doing this shit for years."
 

Blue Skies

Banned
Mar 27, 2019
9,224
If mueller investigations was a snail, this is a cheetah

this is moving so fast and I hate how there's this awfully inconvenient 2 week recess.
The important people are still gonna work on it tho right?
 

Deleted member 8257

Oct 26, 2017
24,586
I really hope Bill Barr recuses himself out of any and every Ukraine related thing. You know he is itching to squash this whole thing.
 

Deleted member 8257

Oct 26, 2017
24,586
If mueller investigations was a snail, this is a cheetah

this is moving so fast and I hate how there's this awfully inconvenient 2 week recess.
The important people are still gonna work on it tho right?
The committees doing the impeachment are staying in DC. Pelosi made it clear to them to keep up the momentum. Jim Himes is flying out of US (possibly to Ukraine) on impeachment inquiry related trip.
 

Ithil

Member
Oct 25, 2017
23,434
I'd forgotten Rex Tillerson even existed until that 2017 Russia story had those photos of them all yucking it up in the Oval Office. That seems like decades ago.
 

shinra-bansho

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,964
Warren and Sanders are similar. Only one seems to know what it'll take to win.
Warren's coalition is a product of both her policies and her personal style.
...
Warren, does well with voters who say they're very liberal or liberal and gets less support from self-described moderates. But her support isn't entirely due to her policy positions policy: Rather, her hyper-wonkish approach attracts a solid number of white-collar professionals and drives up her numbers among voters with high incomes and a lot of formal education
Warren's progressivism is such that it allows her to walk the line between insider and outsider. She's been a Democrat for her entire career in electoral politics and seems to focus more on having "a plan for that" than starting a full revolution. But she shows what seems like a genuine dislike for Wall Street, pharmaceutical companies and the other normal targets of left populism. That stylistic mix shows up in the polls: Warren's coalition is made up of a combination of those who supported Sanders in 2016 and those who preferred Hillary Clinton.
Sanders is mostly winning a subset of voters that he already won in 2016. That includes some ideological liberals who see Warren as an acceptable second choice; some anti-establishment voters who like Sanders because they think the political system is "rigged"; and some voters who liked him last time and aren't paying much attention to the election yet. But it also includes a mishmash of voters who prefer him for stylistic or demographic reasons.
Sanders' political rhetoric is pugilistic, direct and aggressive in a very male way. And Sanders may be grabbing some voters who want a male candidate.
That's not to say that all Sanders voters are sexist — most aren't. Agadjanian told me that only 23 percent of Sanders supporters had an above-neutral level of sexism on this scale. But it's plausible that sexist voters (or those who are more neutral on gender issues) may consciously or unconsciously gravitate to Biden, Andrew Yang or some other male candidate rather than Warren.
The right solution for both candidates is to cast a wide net and not just look enviously at the vote share of other progressives. For months, Sanders hasn't had much success with this. His national vote share has been stagnant, and his strategy is basically identical to his (failed) 2016 method. Warren, on the other hand, has been gaining in the polls and trying to fuse together parts of the Sanders and Clinton coalition. And that plan seems a lot more likely to succeed than the Sanders revolution.

Seems pretty accurate.
 

adam387

Member
Nov 27, 2017
5,215
You know who told us who Donald Trump was? You know who TRIED to warn the people? You know who SAID WHAT WAS GONNA HAPPEN AND THEN IT DID HAPPEN?

source.gif
 

devSin

Member
Oct 27, 2017
6,198
You know ... I just realized that he was probably doing this stuff as the Mueller report was coming out. Meaning he should have been recused from that too.
He should never have been confirmed.

But he was, and he's not going to recuse himself. Covering up this administration's malfeasance is his top priority, and the sole reason he got the job.

You know who told us who Donald Trump was? You know who TRIED to warn the people? You know who SAID WHAT WAS GONNA HAPPEN AND THEN IT DID HAPPEN?
Yeah, but hot sauce.
 

adam387

Member
Nov 27, 2017
5,215
tenor.gif

Literally me if this ends up boiling down to Trump illegally deleting things off a SERVER.
I'm already feeling a cackle in my throat.

Edit: That's a really low key clapback on that whole thing from Trump. Like...seriously.
 

devSin

Member
Oct 27, 2017
6,198
Literally me if this ends up boiling down to Trump illegally deleting things off a SERVER.
I'm already feeling a cackle in my throat.
Not even amused in the slightest.

I can see the media now trying to draw false parallels. People coming into this thread to try to argue that the two are equivalent.

I still get furious at some of these GIFs (not JIFs).
 

adam387

Member
Nov 27, 2017
5,215
I can see the media now trying to draw false parallels. People coming into this thread to try to argue that the two are equivalent.
Who here in their right mind has argued this has anything remotely to do with a private email server or that the two things are related? But, would I find it hilarious if the GOP ends up having to defend deleting data off a server? Yes. Yes I would. But you're right. There are no parallels. What Trump did was illegal. Sometimes you just gotta laugh at the absurdity of the universe.
Truth must be spoken.
I only serve hot tea.
 

adam387

Member
Nov 27, 2017
5,215
This country is full of people who deserve much better.

I said it.
That's nice.

Anyway, I don't think the other stories will pick up steam until such time as they can be corroborated. I'm guessing the House Intelligence Committee is going to have to get those records ASAP. Schiff said on Rachel last night what we all knew--that there is nothing that is too classified for Congress to get. So, getting those call logs shouldn't be too difficult. What will be interesting is if during any of the depositions we can get anyone on record as saying they know/believe/heard that additional information was put on there that shouldn't have been. Probably the whistle blower can help on that with names that they need to speak to. This thing could crack wide open after a few hearings.
 

adam387

Member
Nov 27, 2017
5,215
so like

can they have a secret conviction vote
Technically, they can set the rules for impeachment in the Senate. They can have closed door deliberations that are not made public, if they vote to do that. However, I don't know if they can vote totally anonymously. There's no real secret ballot in Congress. Every other impeachment has been a public vote. You can watch Clinton's online if you want. The Constitution is pretty unclear with how impeachment has to work, allowing the Senate a lot of leeway into crafting their own rules. There's a memo from 1986 that outlines the rules that are currently in place, but they can be changed.

This is reason 9,342 we need to codify a lot of this shit into actual laws not just gentleman's agreements.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.