Dem's not doing their due dilligence

[JFigliuolo]

Can someone provide a serious answer to why the Dems did not follow through the courts/judicial process? I can't seem to find any legitimate reason. It does not appear they put in a reasonable effort if they truely wanted the case to have any significant weight to it.

[Pete F.]

I think they assumed that the fact that the majority of Americans want witnesses to be called would move enough of the Senators to vote for witnesses.
Unfortunately they may have been wrong.

Interstingly (sic on purpose) enough, a senator who says he is voting against witnesses had this to say "There is no need for more evidence to conclude that the president withheld United States aid, at least in part, to pressure Ukraine to investigate the Bidens; the House managers have proved this with what they call a “mountain of overwhelming evidence. It was inappropriate for the president to ask a foreign leader to investigate his political opponent and to withhold United States aid to encourage that investigation."

In other words, he's guilty AF.

The Democrat's choice of strategy will be argued over for decades, assuming the Republic lasts that long.

[JFigliuolo]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

I think they assumed that the fact that the majority of Americans want witnesses to be called would move enough of the Senators to vote for witnesses.
<Snipped> .

Wow... well them shame on them. I doubt any lawyer would count on assumptions to nail down a case.

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by JFigliuolo

Wow... well them shame on them. I doubt any lawyer would count on assumptions to nail down a case.

They do all the time in court.

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by JFigliuolo

Wow... well them shame on them. I doubt any lawyer would count on assumptions to nail down a case.

Every other impeachment hearing has had witnesses.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by PaulS

Every other impeachment hearing has had witnesses.

please stop the whining...

[fishgolf]

The House goofed up by not noting the "crime" in the articles, only that that a category of possible crime is noted as either article.

This is not a "trial of no witnesses" as Schiff's team just noted on TV, it is a trial that was poorly prepared by the Democrat team. The Democrats continue to whine.

This will have no effect on our effective democracy, it is the result of our effective democracy.

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by scottw

please stop the whining...

Pls. stop the snarkiness.

[wdmso]

It would not have changed the outcome

Republican have sold out since the sunt they pulled with Garland . They seek unlimited un accountable power by delegitimizing the press social norms and expected Presidential behavior.. now its all for ratings in the base
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[fishgolf]

The democrats would like a more socialist nation. Not a good idea, except for those who wish the government would take care of all their needs. Recall an Obama clip in a democrat home. He asked the woman of the house "what can the government do for you?"
The reply? "I need a new kitchen", she said... Obama, "we'll get you a new kitchen"... If the government would run a surplus, we could supply all the kitchen's needed.

Interest rates are too low. But we (USA) owe so much, an increase would would quickly increase our nat'l debt. We need increased capitalism that generates more jobs that increase tax collection for a long period to reduce that debt. Republicans more likely to deliver on that than Democrats over the longer term. Current Admin increases Geo-polititical risk, but our military (bless them) footprint relatively small at the moment.

Real risk to peace, long term, is the spread of Islam... yes, it is. We (Gov) don't seem to know if we support Sunni or Shia interests. We fight Sunni Al-Qaeda, but support Saudi Arabia. We take out Shia General and try to contain Iran, while supporting Shia Iraq, weird. Both Shia and Sunni, have it out for any state that is not Muslim because that what Islam teaches. Even Russia and Ukraine struggle with "domestic terrorism" in the form of radical Islamic influence.
Jeepers... Can you tell I'm retired with lots of time to read and research? Bruins are on... what a second period against Winnipeg!!
I hope you all have a great weekend and watch the Super Bowl to have some fun.

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by fishgolf

The democrats would like a more socialist nation. Not a good idea,

I disagree with this mantra ,, but seeing what happed in the Senate have opened the door for a POTUS to set a socialist policy
Because he has unlimited power
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

Originally Posted by wdmso

I disagree with this mantra ,, but seeing what happed in the Senate have opened the door for a POTUS to set a socialist policy
Because he has unlimited power
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I disagree with this nonsense

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

I disagree with this mantra ,, but seeing what happed in the Senate have opened the door for a POTUS to set a socialist policy
Because he has unlimited power
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Bernie is likely to win Iowa and for sure NH, and you deny that the current democrat party is becoming more socialist.

Trump has unlimited power? he did away with checks and
balances and the supreme court? for god’s sake, if he had unlimited power, would he let CNN exist??
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by JFigliuolo

Can someone provide a serious answer to why the Dems did not follow through the courts/judicial process? I can't seem to find any legitimate reason. It does not appear they put in a reasonable effort if they truely wanted the case to have any significant weight to it.

Probably because they knew that they did not actually have a winnable case. They did the best they could to make it appear that they did. Just like the concocted Mueller investigation that consisted of most likely planted circumstantial "evidence" made to look legit by a fraudulent FISA application. There has obviously been a concerted effort to remove Trump with a constant flow of manufactured or conjectured Trump crimes and misdeeds that began as soon as, or before, he was elected. It all has the professional touch of skilled intelligence operators in conjunction with like-minded politicians who either just want to get or keep power any way they can, and/or have something to hide and need to get rid of him before his swamp search and destroy mission can successfully out them.

Ergo they have to keep up the pressure to oust or damage Trump beyond electability before the next election, and so they won't stop with this current impeachment which they hope has caused him some significant number of votes. This kind of chit will continue. More books, articles, bombshells, charges will keep coming. And the overall pretext for specific attempts will be that Trump is corrupt, dangerous, a threat to the Republic, a destroyer of the Constitution, a criminal, and generally a more vile piece of scum than any President or politician in our history.

There will be the constant drip, drip, drip, that gives Pete F so much joy. There will be the constant lying accusations of racism and the various phobes and blatant media lies like the Charlotte good Nazis on both sides scam. Their will be no relenting on the narrative of him colluding or conspiring with foreign powers to weaken our nation, and a continuous attempt to picture what are his substantial economic, social, legislative, and judicial successes as actually being failures, or a mirage, or due to previous administrations.

It will continue to be a scorched earth attempt to destroy him and anything positive about him. Get ready for the next one. It should be coming soon. Maybe the coronavirus will present an auspicious opportunity for it.

[scottw]

it will be fun to see what the democraps dream up next....you know they are huddled and plotting more mischief this weekend

[spence]

Primaries always play to the fringe Jim. Trump is the first time in recent history one actually got through.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

Originally Posted by spence

Primaries always play to the fringe Jim. Trump is the first time in recent history one actually got through.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

he kicked down the door

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

Primaries always play to the fringe Jim. Trump is the first time in recent history one actually got through.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

come on. not like this.

Spence, your party is a
million miles to the left of where it was not long ago. Ten years ago, even among democrats, bernie was a nut and a laughingstock on the fringe. he’s never gotten anything done.

Now he’s going to win Iowa.

Only one of the top tier candidates is maybe less liberal than Nancy Pelosi, that’s Biden.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

Primaries always play to the fringe Jim. Trump is the first time in recent history one actually got through.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

trumps not a radical conservative. not even close, not in terms of
policy. he’s very moderate in terms of policy. conservatives were very concerned that he was too liberal.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

Bernie lost the Iowa caucus by less than 1% in 2016. He has a good ground game there. Dems haven’t really moved in decades.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

Bernie lost the Iowa caucus by less than 1% in 2016. He has a good ground game there. Dems haven’t really moved in decades.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

give us a break spence. abortions
until the 9th month, as many sexes as the imagination can come
up with, men in the ladies room, reparations, green new deals, loan
forgiveness, medicare for all, free
everything.

what was bernie polling at nationally10 years ago, compared to now? bill clinton kicked
millions off welfare to pay for a tax cut, and created a surplus. compare that to today

AOCis the#1 fundraiser in the whole house.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[The Dad Fisherman]

Democratic Party used to be the party of the working man, not so much anymore.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

Democratic Party used to be the party of the working man, not so much anymore.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

also used to be the expected party of catholics. not now, boy! spence will say that the catholic church changed.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

Democratic Party used to be the party of the working man, not so much anymore.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

And you think the Republicans are the party for the working man?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

And you think the Republicans are the party for the working man?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

neither party looking out for the working man the way they should, in terms of economics. in social
issues, you go ask blue collar workers in the rust belt how they feel about 9th month abortions, reparations, green new deals, al
sharpton, and free everything.

The progressive wing is leading the democratic party into lunatic positions.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by wdmso

And you think the Republicans are the party for the working man?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

What is it that Detbuch says, you're seeing things that were never said.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

What is it that Detbuch says, you're seeing things that were never said.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Its a question. sorry if thats a hard concept
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Its a question. sorry if thats a hard concept
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Well, they certainly align with more working class values than the Democratic Party, so there's that.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[wdmso]

The Iowa caucus winner has no influence on who'll win the nomination

Ask Ted Cruz
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

The Iowa caucus winner has no influence on who'll win the nomination

Ask Ted Cruz
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

bernie also polling very well outside of Iowa.

the party apparatus is terrified of how bernie is polling, which is why they’re changing the rules now to help Bloomberg. and it’s why hilary is bashing Bernie.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device