• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Exhibit ‘A’ DJT Second Impeachment

Saw it earlier. Good stuff. Easily as good as the Lincoln Project, which is to say very good!
 
Chomsky said:
Saw it earlier. Good stuff. Easily as good as the Lincoln Project, which is to say very good!
Click to expand...
If DEMs don’t take the high road and just Censure, there will be no peace in our Nation and no solving of critical problems.

A Censure vote would be a very tough vote for the GOP and would further divide them after Trump’s treason.

Freezing the Senate to start the Biden admin with a trial is the dumbest and most politically damaging thing DEMs could do.

The Biden admin has zero Cabinet members approved by the Senate, goes in blind from a non-transition, and faces enormously critical issues by the end of January.
 
Rexedgar said:
Click to expand...


Cite Quotes from his speech ... You Traitor.
Because you can't.But we have V.P elect Kamala Harris saying this after months
of Insurrectionist acts upon Federal Bldgs. and people just walking streets.
where 19 human lives were lost and over $ 2 Billion in property damage.
Harris said ... " They're Not going to stop.This is a Movement.
They're Not going to let up and they should not let up. "
Plus she was instrumental in supporting { raising money }
to Bail out BLM and Antifa members.
 
Linc said:
‘Refuse Fascism’ protests. End Trump’s ‘fascist coup’.
Click to expand...

Because we all know what Antifa means.It means Anti-Fascism.
Talk about use of a Contronym
 
Linc said:
If DEMs don’t take the high road and just Censure, there will be no peace in our Nation and no solving of critical problems.

A Censure vote would be a very tough vote for the GOP and would further divide them after Trump’s treason.

Freezing the Senate to start the Biden admin with a trial is the dumbest and most politically damaging thing DEMs could do.

The Biden admin has zero Cabinet members approved by the Senate, goes in blind from a non-transition, and faces enormously critical issues by the end of January.
Click to expand...

You make reasonable and compelling arguments. I'm not sure if a non-impeachment censure can prevent Trump for ever attaining office, but that seems to be the big concern here. Then there's the need to do it to show sedition will not be tolerated, in order to act as a prophylactic for Trump or future Presidents.

To play politics, rather than act nobly & altruistically, could have it's own dangers. The Dems got substantive support & respect for doing the right thing with the first impeachment.
 
Last edited:
foolardi said:
Because we all know what Antifa means.It means Anti-Fascism.
Talk about use of a Contronym
Click to expand...
See the San Diego pro- and anti- Trump protester clash yesterday. This shit is a long way from being over. RT and our enemies love it.
 
Antiwar said:
Hello. How are you doing?
Click to expand...
So what?

Sorry, but your comment doesn't dispute anything Levin said in that video. Heck, Levin wasn't even talking about Trump in that video.
 
Mycroft said:
So what?

Sorry, but your comment doesn't dispute anything Levin said in that video. Heck, Levin wasn't even talking about Trump in that video.
Click to expand...
The video took too long to load. I've heard Levin before; no need to listen; no need to dispute.
 
Chomsky said:
You make reasonable and compelling arguments. I'm not sure if a non-impeachment censure can prevent Trump for ever attaining office, but that seems to be the big concern here. Then there's the need to do it show sedition will not be tolerated, in order to act as a prophylactic for Trump or future Presidents. To play politics, rather than act nobly & altruistically, could have it's own dangers. The Dems got substantive support & respect for doing the right thing with the first impeachment.
Click to expand...

Say Brainian ... learn something.There is not time for an Impeachment.Plus
in order to start { McConnell is still Senate Majority leader } it requires all 100
senators or a Unanimous vote to proceed.The senate is basically in recess.
There are but 2 pro-forma sessions { Jan. 12th and Jan. 15th } where very little
business takes place.I believe McConnell is unwilling to accommodate a nutter
Impeachment trial.Why would he.It hurts him historically.
Plus the more he learns about this So-Called act of Insurrection the more
he's likely to take pause.Considering these so called advocates for demanding
Trump and supporters get immediate punishment ... McConnells home was
just stormed a week ago by Protestors.
Use yer doggone head ... pally.
 
Antiwar said:
The video took too long to load. I've heard Levin before; no need to listen; no need to dispute.
Click to expand...
LOL!!

Good excuse.

You are dismissed.
 
Chomsky said:
You make reasonable and compelling arguments. I'm not sure if a non-impeachment censure can prevent Trump for ever attaining office, but that seems to be the big concern here. Then there's the need to do it show sedition will not be tolerated, in order to act as a prophylactic for Trump or future Presidents. To play politics, rather than act nobly & altruistically, could have it's own dangers. The Dems got substantive support & respect for doing the right thing with the first impeachment.
Click to expand...
I don’t think we have time to act nobly by impeaching again. Our Hospitals are ready to crash. With 4,000+ dying in a day from COVID, with parts of COVID relief running out in January and future months, we can’t have the Senate frozen with a trial. And then there’s the ongoing Russian hack and no Cabinet.
foolardi said:
Say Brainian ... learn something.There is not time for an Impeachment.Plus
in order to start { McConnell is still Senate Majority leader } it requires all 100
senators or a Unanimous vote to proceed.The senate is basically in recess.
There are but 2 pro-forma sessions { Jan. 12th and Jan. 15th } where very little
business takes place.I believe McConnell is unwilling to accommodate a nutter
Impeachment trial.Why would he.It hurts him historically.
Plus the more he learns about this So-Called act of Insurrection the more
he's likely to take pause.Considering these so called advocates for demanding
Trump and supporters get immediate punishment ... McConnells home was
just stormed a week ago by Protestors.
Use yer doggone head ... pally.
Click to expand...
McConnell’s home was stormed by Trump’s SS. Reich-wing militias occupied the premises of the Kentucky Capitol yesterday. It’s now out of hand across other states.
 
Chomsky said:
Saw it earlier. Good stuff. Easily as good as the Lincoln Project, which is to say very good!
Click to expand...

What a crock.Started by disgruntled McCain man Steve " SS " Schmidt.
The guys a verifiable loon.I don't think anybody really likes the guy.
Just because MSNBC needs him to be Totally and verifiably Anti-Trump
does not equate to Schmidt being liked.He' as likable as Brutus,
Popeyes nemesis.And his Olive Oyl being Nicolle Wallace.
 
The media won't tell you that president said this in his speech on Jan 6th.

We’re going walk down to the Capitol, and we’re going to cheer on our brave senators, and congressmen and women.

I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.
 
Mycroft said:
LOL!!

Good excuse.

You are dismissed.
Click to expand...

Ask another Leftist brainiac how long Levin's best Seller was on the
New York Times best seller list.Which in and of itself is practically an
act of God.That book being :
- Unfreedom of the Press - { 2019 }
 
Common Sense 1 said:
The media won't tell you that president said this in his speech on Jan 6th.

We’re going walk down to the Capitol, and we’re going to cheer on our brave senators, and congressmen and women.

I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.
Click to expand...


Cherry-picking!


Here’s is the transcript:

www.rev.com

Donald Trump "Save America" Speech January 6 | Transcripts

Donald Trump spoke at a "Save America" rally in Washington, D.C. on January 6 before Congress was set to confirm the election results. "We will never concede," he said. Read the transcript of his speech remarks here.
www.rev.com www.rev.com
 
Turley: Swift new impeachment would damage the Constitution
thehill.com

Turley: Swift new impeachment would damage the Constitution

The case for articles is weak for what he did.
thehill.com thehill.com

Democrats are seeking to remove Trump on the basis of his remarks to supporters before the rioting at the Capitol. Like others, I condemned those remarks as he gave them, calling them reckless and wrong. I also opposed the challenges to electoral votes in Congress. But his address does not meet the definition for incitement under the criminal code. It would be viewed as protected speech by the Supreme Court.

The legal standard for violent speech is found with Clarence Brandenburg versus Ohio. As a free speech advocate, I criticized that 1969 case and its dangerously vague standard. But even it would treat the remarks of Trump as protected under the First Amendment. With that case, the government is able to criminalize speech “directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action.”

There was no call for lawless action by Trump. Instead, there was a call for a protest at the Capitol. Moreover, violence was not imminent, as the vast majority of the tens of thousands of protesters were not violent before the march, and most did not riot inside the Capitol. Like many violent protests in the last four years, criminal conduct was carried out by a smaller group of instigators. Capitol Police knew of the march but declined an offer from the National Guard since they did not view violence as likely.

So Congress is now seeking an impeachment for remarks covered by the First Amendment. It would create precedent for the impeachment of any president blamed for violent acts of others after using reckless language.
 
Common Sense 1 said:
Turley: Swift new impeachment would damage the Constitution
thehill.com

Turley: Swift new impeachment would damage the Constitution

The case for articles is weak for what he did.
thehill.com thehill.com

Democrats are seeking to remove Trump on the basis of his remarks to supporters before the rioting at the Capitol. Like others, I condemned those remarks as he gave them, calling them reckless and wrong. I also opposed the challenges to electoral votes in Congress. But his address does not meet the definition for incitement under the criminal code. It would be viewed as protected speech by the Supreme Court.

The legal standard for violent speech is found with Clarence Brandenburg versus Ohio. As a free speech advocate, I criticized that 1969 case and its dangerously vague standard. But even it would treat the remarks of Trump as protected under the First Amendment. With that case, the government is able to criminalize speech “directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action.”

There was no call for lawless action by Trump. Instead, there was a call for a protest at the Capitol. Moreover, violence was not imminent, as the vast majority of the tens of thousands of protesters were not violent before the march, and most did not riot inside the Capitol. Like many violent protests in the last four years, criminal conduct was carried out by a smaller group of instigators. Capitol Police knew of the march but declined an offer from the National Guard since they did not view violence as likely.

So Congress is now seeking an impeachment for remarks covered by the First Amendment. It would create precedent for the impeachment of any president blamed for violent acts of others after using reckless language.
Click to expand...


As it should.....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom