[SpecialOlympian]

That doesn't address the pertinence of their faith.

Blackjack is a bigot who watches far right YouTubes. These YouTubes are not exactly all that enthusiastic about Jewish people in politics.

[Big Steve-1]

Blackjack is a bigot who watches far right YouTubes.

I watch stupid cat videos and car racing wrecks.

[Drlee]

I watch Taylor Swift music videos.

[late]

I do a lot of old music, astronomy videos, bicycle and e-bike videos, Loose Women, Ted talks, economists, etc.

[Hindsite]

Senate GOP passes resolution setting up end of Trump trial

Senate Republicans muscled through a resolution on Friday night that paves the way for President Trump to be acquitted by the middle of next week.

The Senate voted along party lines 53-47 on the resolution, with every Democratic senator opposing it after Republicans rejected allowing witnesses or documents as part of the trial.

"A majority of the U.S. Senate has determined that the numerous witnesses and 28,000-plus pages of documents already in evidence are sufficient to judge the House Managers’ accusations and end this impeachment trial," Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said in a statement.

Under the deal reached by Republicans, the Senate will reconvene on Monday, skipping the normal Saturday session required by the chamber's impeachment rules.

Both Trump's legal team and House managers will get two hours each to deliver their closing arguments. Once that is finished the Senate will then effectively put the impeachment trial on pause until Wednesday at 4 p.m., when senators will move to vote on the articles of impeachment.

In the interim, senators will be able to use the Senate floor to speak publicly and explain their votes, unlike during the impeachment trial itself, when they are expected to sit silently.

Some, like Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), wanted to grind through Friday night and acquit Trump by early Saturday morning.

But a GOP aide said that a small group of Republicans had raised concerns about the break-neck pace and instead wanted to follow the Clinton model from 1999, which allowed for days of deliberations.

Republicans managed to pass the resolution on Friday night after shooting down a number of Democratic amendments, including a last-ditch attempt to subpoena former national security adviser John Bolton and acting chief of staff Mick Mulvaney.

Despite getting their witnesses requests rejected for a second time in a day, a spokesman for Schumer claimed victory, saying Republicans had wanted to "rush through" the acquittal votes on Friday night.

"Democrats wanted votes on witnesses and documents, for the House Managers to be able to make closing arguments, ample time for every member to speak, and to prevent GOP from rushing this through," the spokesman added.

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/480 ... rump-trial

[annatar1914]

''Out of nothing, nothing comes''

''A tale told by an Idiot, sound and fury, signifying nothing''.

What a massive exercise in collective onanism

[Rich]

Nancy Pelosi is many things but she's not stupid. Doesn't mean she can't believe stupid things. She couldn't put off impeachment any longer. She had to satisfy the base and once the Neo Cons started signalling that they might even support removal it undermined any case for restraint. Once started her overriding concern has been to protect and help Biden. Hence the rush to judgement and the secret KGB / Gestapo style secret hearings, designed to cover up corrupt Joe's behaviour.

But having got the vote to impeach she sat on it. The purpose of the delay, was to tie Sanders and Warren down in these pointless, tedious Senate hearings at this crucial time, giving Biden a free hand to campaign in Iowa. Unfortunately for Pelosi, Joe, come to Daddy Biden, doesn't really seem to have made great use of this unfair advantage.

[Godstud]

@Rich No, the delay was to collect even more evidence. She stated such recently on the Bill Maher show, a week ago.

I guess American found out that Trump is corrupt, and so is the Senate.

Rome had a Senate, and was still a dictatorship for many years.

[blackjack21]

Once started her overriding concern has been to protect and help Biden.

The irony of this whole thing is if she wanted to protect Biden, she never should have made impeachment about anything related to him. Nobody was going to hear about Biden's corruption at CNN, MSNBC, et. al. until impeachment blew that media protection away. Now at least 10M more people know about what was only known to people who watch Sean Hannity, etc. The absurdity of impeaching Trump for investigating a political rival ostensibly for political advantage when that's what they've been doing to Trump since before Trump was even elected all based an a Hillary Clinton-financed phony dossier is simply incredible.

They then went on to set up an impeachment trial that broke every relevant precedent for impeachment trials to try to stack the deck in their favor. Ultimately, the whole exercise has created an argument for removal that frankly doesn't make sense. It's well summed up by Daniel McCarthy of Spectator:

Impeachment has proved the Democrats are no longer democrats

The Senate is not going to call witnesses in the impeachment trial of Donald Trump, and to all appearances the whole thing is nearly over. Acquittal is imminent, and supposedly serious commentators are on Twitter wailing in unison with Democratic activists. But what they are saying does not make any sense — it’s contradictory. On the one hand, they say that the case against Donald Trump is open-and-shut: so utterly persuasive in objective terms that only the Senate Republicans’ bad faith has prevented them from admitting it. On the other hand, Democrats and the pundits don’t trust voters to be persuaded by this purportedly airtight case — hence all the lamentations about an outcome that will leave Trump’s fate to be decided in November at the ballot box rather than having him removed early by vote of the Senate.

But if the case against Trump is really so strong, why isn’t it a safe bet that voters will dump Trump? Should they be persuaded? It’s not as if there hasn’t been plenty of publicity for the allegations behind the impeachment effort. No doubt the Washington Post, MSNBC, CNN, and the rest will have much more to say about them over the next nine months, too. Nobody can claim the voters haven’t been told. So again, why not trust them to do the right thing, if the right thing is really so objective and obvious?

The question has an easy answer, of course. The people hoping for the Senate to remove Trump are Democrats, but they aren’t democrats, and they think the American voting public already made the wrong choice in 2016.
...
And when you point out the problem with the ‘Trump is obviously guilty, but we can’t trust the public to vote him out’ narrative, liberals reflexively assert that interference will sway the 2020 election, too. After all, they say, what Trump was trying to do in Ukraine was an attempt to sabotage the 2020 election. Here again, however, there’s a disconnect within the argument itself: just how was a Ukrainian investigation into Hunter Biden’s ties to an oligarch-connected oil company going to affect the 2020 election, if it’s really so safe to assume that the young Biden did nothing improper?
...
NeverTrump Republicans and neoconservatives could not, and still cannot, accept the idea that their program has been so thoroughly repudiated by the public that voters would rather have someone like Donald Trump in the White House than anyone who supports the Bush-McCain-Romney vision of the country.

Even Romney comes in for a whipping. McCarthy does a good summation of why Trump was elected too.

Donald Trump was elected to break the grip of such a class on our country — a constitutional president to defy the extra-constitutional authority of the elite. His success in doing so has been limited, and it will continue to be. But his enemies recognize what he and the defiant public that voted for him represent — a rebellion against their authority and a threat to the belief system on which their power depends.

It's also coming to an end. We're all so conditioned to the phony anonymous leaks and the subsequent media brouhaha that we just reflexively disbelieve it now. Their old school psychological operations have the exact opposite of their intended effect.

The purpose of the delay, was to tie Sanders and Warren down in these pointless, tedious Senate hearings at this crucial time, giving Biden a free hand to campaign in Iowa. Unfortunately for Pelosi, Joe, come to Daddy Biden, doesn't really seem to have made great use of this unfair advantage.

This is why I think Pelosi et. al. shouldn't be lauded as geniuses. Pelosi is a solid retail politician. She's not known as a brilliant strategist. I met her when I was 18 years old in state senator Quintin Kopp's hotel suite with a buddy of mine who's father was heavy into politics. I didn't have a clue who she was, but she was nevertheless coming up an introducing herself to me--a nobody 18-year old punk. She was not in Congress yet, but was gunning for Sala Burton's seat--who was terminally ill at the time.

@Rich No, the delay was to collect even more evidence. She stated such recently on the Bill Maher show, a week ago.

This is why the entire thing failed. So many politicians are also trained as lawyers. You conduct the investigation before you go to trial. Not during the trial. They billed this as an open-and-shut case. They only have themselves to blame for it. When the defense can use video evidence of the prosecution's witnesses against the defendant, it's a pretty poor case and that was made transparently clear.

[Patrickov]

Impeachment has proved the Democrats are no longer democrats

Assume that the Bidens are guilty and should be persecuted, whoever knows that should report to FBI and CIA for investigation the matter. Trump, even if he knows the case, should not publicly give any comment, or pressure anybody to do anything himself. The reason is, any investigation is judicial procedure and Trump is an executive representative. Executive interfering judicial process violates the Separation of Powers. Therefore, I cannot say it is wrong that Trump is impeached for this (whether it justifies his removal is debatable). I believe that some Democrats push for this matter because they think procedural justice needs to be reserved.

The author of the above link effectively said the Democrats want to horse through the system, and believe that the Democrats think the voters are stupid in having Trump elected. Well, sometimes we can say it is a fact that some (or even many) voters are stupid or selfish; but frankly, if that's been the case I think the Democrats or anti-Trumpers have every right to resort to even more drastic means, such as violence, riot or eve assassination. Instead, they try to stick to the procedures, despite them fully aware that it is not going to go through due to the heavy partisan nature of American politics.

It is OK to say the Democrats are stupid, but maybe they should be appreciated for sticking to the principles believed by most ordinary people.

[Patrickov]

Report from the Guardian

In explaining their “no” votes, several Republicans said they believed that Trump had acted inappropriately but did not deserve to be removed.

I kind of think similarly, but then I have a question: Should conviction be considered out of what breach of law is done more than how the breach of law is done?

I will say if conviction can end with some punishments other than immediate removal from office (e.g. curtail of presidential power for a certain period, or in near-removal cases, can be for the rest of the term), the threshold of conviction can be lowered to (absolute) simple majority and it will be easier to convict people who should be convicted.

[Big Steve-1]

I kind of think similarly, but then I have a question: Should conviction be considered out of what breach of law is done more than how the breach of law is done?

I will say if conviction can end with some punishments other than immediate removal from office (e.g. curtail of presidential power for a certain period, or in near-removal cases, can be for the rest of the term), the threshold of conviction can be lowered to (absolute) simple majority and it will be easier to convict people who should be convicted.

The only thing that could come close to allowing that would be the 25th Amendment, and that's not something that's used as a punitive measure, so that wouldn't work. I don't believe the Constitution has a provision for slapping the wrist of a President.

You'd also have to define what "near removal" means? I think in this case, "near removal" was never really an option, simply because we knew going into the trial that Trump wouldn't be convicted and removed.

Congress could have gone with other punitive measures, but they opted against that. They could have censured the President, and odds are good that a lot of Republicans would've been okay with that. It doesn't count for a lot, but it would be better (for the Democrats) than an acquittal.

Something interesting that I see in all of this. During the arguments regarding witnesses, House Impeachment Managers argued that the Senate needed to hear from witnesses who had first hand knowledge of Trump's conduct with regards to Ukraine.

That tells me that this whole trial was brought about on the basis of hearsay, which is not admissible in court.

It's water under the bridge at this point, but I have more than a bit of a problem with that.

[Big Steve-1]

@Rich No, the delay was to collect even more evidence. She stated such recently on the Bill Maher show, a week ago.

I think it was inappropriate for her to do that show. To me it kind of mocks the entire impeachment process and detracts from the solemn duty the Senate had before them.

[Hindsite]

@Rich No, the delay was to collect even more evidence. She stated such recently on the Bill Maher show, a week ago.

They would not have needed to collect more evidence if they had done a good job and not rushed the impeachment hearing to get it done before the Christmas break. Anyway, the House managers came into the Senate trial claiming they already had the evidence to prove guilt beyond any doubt, according to Nadler.

I guess American found out that Trump is corrupt, and so is the Senate.

No, Americans found out that President Trump is a great law and order president that calls out corruption, even when it occurs in a foreign country. America found out that the Democrats are corrupt, both in the House of Representatives and the Senate and Adam Schiff of California is the biggest liar of the bunch.

Rome had a Senate, and was still a dictatorship for many years.

In contrast, the American Senate just saved the democratic republic of the great nation of the U.S. of A.
Praise the Lord.

[SpecialOlympian]

Delaying the impeachment process kept Trump angry and unfocused, which is good. His policies are bad and anything that distracts him from implementing them is therefore good.

I wonder how drugged up Trump will be for the State of the Union so he can read off a teleprompter without launching into a rant about the impeachment. Like it's gonna be lol if the president nods off like he's on heroin mid speech.

[jimjam]

Delaying the impeachment process kept Trump angry and unfocused, which is good. His policies are bad and anything that distracts him from implementing them is therefore good.

I wonder how drugged up Trump will be for the State of the Union so he can read off a teleprompter without launching into a rant about the impeachment. Like it's gonna be lol if the president nods off like he's on heroin mid speech.

I have often wondered what drugs they are pumping into Fatso. Maybe he will entertain us during his State of the Union with antidotes on how his toilet isn't flushing fast enough or his love of trucks.

[Hindsite]

Delaying the impeachment process kept Trump angry and unfocused, which is good. His policies are bad and anything that distracts him from implementing them is therefore good.

I wonder how drugged up Trump will be for the State of the Union so he can read off a teleprompter without launching into a rant about the impeachment. Like it's gonna be lol if the president nods off like he's on heroin mid speech.

President Trump does not take illegal drugs. He is the law and order president. He doesn't even smoke or drink alcoholic beverages.

[SpecialOlympian]

I have often wondered what drugs they are pumping into Fatso. Maybe he will entertain us during his State of the Union with antidotes on how his toilet isn't flushing fast enough or his love of trucks.

He's telling people at rallies that it takes him 15 flushes to sink his own turds so anything is possible.

We might seriously get Trump saying something along the lines of,

"This biker, straight out of central casting, big strong man, big strong biker, he comes up to me, crying, saying 'Mr. President, I can't flush my poopies. My poopies, they don't flush.' and this is all because of the Do Nothing Democrats who don't want you to flush your toilet. They don't want you to flush. They hate it when you flush. You flush the toilet now and all that comes out is steam. Steam. Sssssteam. Only steam comes out of the toilet. A big strong biker man cried to me about this."

[Ter]

I watch stupid cat videos and car racing wrecks.

I watch drunken Russians in spectacular car accidents, also people doing stupid shit and hurting themselves.
I think it is called Schadenfreude.

[Hindsite]

He's telling people at rallies that it takes him 15 flushes to sink his own turds so anything is possible.

We might seriously get Trump saying something along the lines of, "This biker, straight out of central casting, big strong man, big strong biker, he comes up to me, crying, saying 'Mr. President, I can't flush my poopies. My poopies, they don't flush.' and this is all because of the Do Nothing Democrats who don't want you to flush your toilet. They don't want you to flush. They hate it when you flush.

I think he was just complaining about the new so-called water saver toilets and shower heads by a little exaggeration like comedians often do. It makes it kind of funny. I have one of those two push button water saver type toilets in the master bedroom, so I can understand what he is joking about. You lefties always take him too seriously.