Printable version of thread

Posted by: Crazy Chris 20th January 2020, 07:24 PM

So Trump's impeachment trial starts tomorrow and will last a few weeks. We could have President Pence by March then!

Posted by: Auld Lang Peen 20th January 2020, 07:31 PM

You know why they chose NOW to send it to a stacked senate with no hope of a fair trial yes? Bernie Sanders and Warren to a lesser extent. They want them away from the campaign trails for Pete and Biden to grow.

Posted by: Crazy Chris 20th January 2020, 07:44 PM

I have read that accusation, yes.

Posted by: Crazy Chris 21st January 2020, 02:06 PM

Live coverage on Sky News from 6pm. It'll surely be as boring as hell.

Posted by: Crazy Chris 21st January 2020, 05:08 PM

Does anyone here know if Trump himself will give evidence? Wouldn't want to miss that!

Posted by: Iz~ 22nd January 2020, 07:24 AM

Now the impeachment trial has started, I've split out the posts about that trial to get it more visibility - this was part of my plan by closing the old thread, as the discussion over whether it's right or not that Trump should be removed from office is a different one from the current argument about the best Democratic candidate, so we can discuss both in their separate threads.

And should he not be removed, as is expected, it was better when we had a dedicated Trump thread so this can serve as that x

From what I've seen of the trial, it's like this:

Nothing says innocent like making a case that witnesses shouldn't be present at a trial.

Posted by: Crazy Chris 22nd January 2020, 08:25 AM

Apparently we may not know until Monday whether or not witnesses and evidence will be allowed. It so should be. How on this earth can you have a trial of any kind without any evidence given?

Posted by: Crazy Chris 22nd January 2020, 08:26 AM

TBH I didn't know whether to start a new thread or not for this.

Posted by: 5 Silas Frøkner 22nd January 2020, 10:40 AM

The republicans aren’t interested in a trial as the deeper down this rabbit warren you go the higher the likelihood is that they’ll lose their grip on power and power is the only thing that matters to the republican law makers

Posted by: Jüpiter👑 22nd January 2020, 12:43 PM

Removed from office and into jail please! Odious creature.

Posted by: Crazy Chris 22nd January 2020, 02:01 PM

Even if found guilty he wouldn't be jailed as President Pence's first job after being sworn in would be to pardon Trump.

Posted by: Auld Lang Peen 22nd January 2020, 02:41 PM

Why would it be? Also he can only pardon FEDERAL crimes. NY is coming for him on taxes, a NY STATE crime. But this isn't a trial. Don't pretend it is just so you can use the cheer emote after the Repukes claim he's innocent. He's not. The evidence is damning. But this isn't a fair trial. Trump's big defence is a president is above the law lol. Sounds more like a dictator. Odious creature. LOCK HIM UP!

Posted by: Crazy Chris 22nd January 2020, 02:51 PM

I won't use the cheer emote. You thanked me for not gloating after the election result, remember? Neither shall I gloat on 31st but doesn't stop me being very happy at all three events.

Posted by: Auld Lang Peen 22nd January 2020, 02:53 PM

And this is not a fair trial. You may as well cheer now as he won't be kicked out by it. He is a billionaire lying fat cat who does nothing to improve the ordinary person's life around the globe, and in fact worsens it by emboldening the neoliberal movement. You'll see once Bernie is #46.

Posted by: Crazy Chris 22nd January 2020, 06:19 PM

Criticism of Trump being out of Washington and indeed the country when his trial began. He was in Davos, Switzerland, doing the job that he was elected to do, giving a speech at the World Economic Forum. Not every President attends every year. Trump went in 2017 and 2018 but George HW and Bush Jr. never went and Clinton only went once. Don't think Obama went either but sent a video speech.

Posted by: *Tim 22nd January 2020, 06:21 PM

In which he patheticly threw shade at an underage girl for stating the truth about climate change :') he shouldnt have attended

Posted by: Auld Lang Peen 22nd January 2020, 06:26 PM

Someone should tell him that when he's watching tv till 5am, tweering at 3am, going golfing and costing the country millions, going golding more than any US president EVER, after promising not to - cheats at golf btw - and he should be in the US right now. He is on trial for abusing the power he was given. He shouldn't have the job anymore.

Posted by: Crazy Chris 22nd January 2020, 06:30 PM

Don't worry I think he's back now. By the way, the POTUS is never off duty, 24 hours a day, 365 days a week. He can be woken during the night in an emergency. Always in touch with the VP and others and no more than a few yards away from the briefcase required to fire US nuclear weapons.

Posted by: Crazy Chris 22nd January 2020, 06:33 PM

It was an Economic Forum and not a climate change forum. If it had been the latter he wouldn't have attended as he doesn't believe in it, like many don't.

Posted by: Auld Lang Peen 22nd January 2020, 06:42 PM

What, a fat cat businessman pretends not to believe in climate change for personal gain?! Shocker!

And no. He is golfing and watching tv. He's sleeping, folks, he's sleeping!

Posted by: Crazy Chris 22nd January 2020, 06:44 PM

You seem to know a lot about his days Michael.

Posted by: Auld Lang Peen 22nd January 2020, 06:45 PM

Perhaps if you did you'd realise he is the worst president in history.

Posted by: Crazy Chris 22nd January 2020, 06:49 PM

You're contradicting yourself a lot. You said he's always sleeping yet you say he's Tweeting at 3am and watching TV until 5am. Make your mind up! Maybe he has insomnia.

Posted by: Auld Lang Peen 23rd January 2020, 05:48 PM

https://edition.cnn.com/2020/01/23/politics/donald-trump-impeachment-trial-witness/index.html

Worse than Nixon. He thinks he's a dictator. If he had any honour, he would resign. And if the trial were a secret vote, he'd be out.

Posted by: vidcapper 24th January 2020, 06:00 AM

Are those times US or GMT?

Posted by: Crazy Chris 24th January 2020, 08:49 AM

From BBC News.

US senators have been accused of falling asleep, playing games and breaking other rules during President Donald Trump's impeachment trial.

Jim Risch and Jim Inhofe are among members who have apparently nodded off during the lengthy hearings.

Crossword puzzles, fidget spinners and at least one paper airplane have been spotted with senators.

The trial has heard that Mr Trump's alleged abuse of power threatens American democracy.

The senators are acting as the jury to decide whether the president should be removed from office.

The upper chamber of US Congress prides itself as a hallowed sanctum of decorum.

But some of its members - Republican and Democrat alike - have this week been accused by US media of acting like bored schoolchildren.

The rules call for senators to remain seated during the impeachment trial.

But at least nine Democrats and 22 Republicans left their seats at various times on Thursday, according to Reuters news agency.

They included Democratic White House hopefuls Bernie Sanders, Amy Klobuchar and Michael Bennet.

Marsha Blackburn, a Tennessee Republican, defended herself on Thursday after she was spotted reading a book in the chamber.

Posted by: Crazy Chris 24th January 2020, 08:57 AM

Good point.

Posted by: Iz~ 24th January 2020, 09:02 AM

lovely bothsidesing right there. Never mind that the two named from the part you quoted are both Republicans, just look at this:

One might expect the Democratic senators running for President to have explainable reasons to leave their seats, to check in with their campaign staff. What's the excuse of the nearly three-times as many Republicans?

Posted by: Crazy Chris 24th January 2020, 09:06 AM

Toilet break?

I would imagine they want to stretch their legs too as it's very boring.

Posted by: Iz~ 24th January 2020, 09:11 AM

In any case, the Republicans who've already said they'll acquit are treating this trial with a complete lack of respect so I'm unsurprised at them being bored.

Trials can be long and boring but this is their responsibility.

Posted by: Crazy Chris 24th January 2020, 03:38 PM

Well of course they are as it should never have been brought. It's just the Dems stamping their feet as they know Trump will probably be re-elected in November.

The sooner it's over and he's acquitted as he will be, the better.

Posted by: Crazy Chris 24th January 2020, 03:46 PM

Michael, your inbox is full.

Posted by: vidcapper 24th January 2020, 03:52 PM

Mine fills up very quickly too.

Posted by: Crazy Chris 24th January 2020, 03:53 PM

So does mine! We must be popular.

Posted by: Suedehead2 24th January 2020, 04:50 PM

If he is so clearly innocent, why is he blocking the prosecution calling certain witnesses?

Posted by: Iz~ 31st January 2020, 08:02 AM

The vote on whether to allow subpoenas for witnesses, like John Bolton, is today. If this fails, then it looks like from what I'm reading that a vote to acquit is held and Trump is expected to be acquitted by the Republicans.

If this is to go any further then, we need a few moderate Republicans like Romney and Susan Collins to stand by what they have said up to now and support calling witnesses. idk guys, seems pretty basic to hear from witnesses.

Posted by: Suedehead2 31st January 2020, 08:57 AM

Yet the orange thing still claims the process is rigged against him. The whole thing is an absolute farce.

Posted by: Crazy Chris 31st January 2020, 09:13 AM

As he says, the trial should never have been brought and the Senate should be doing more worthwhile things like making laws and helping him to run the country.

Posted by: Suedehead2 31st January 2020, 10:41 AM

Why shouldn't it be happening? He has as good as admitted all the allegations against him.

Posted by: Iz~ 31st January 2020, 10:51 AM

Quite possibly looking like a 50-50 tie for witnesses. Romney and Collins look like yeses, but another moderate Republican has decided to vote no, and there were 4 we needed. If the last one, Murkowski votes yes, then it could be up to the presiding officer Chief Justice Roberts to break the tie.

Yes, Trump will want it over by the Superbowl, he'll say that this should be over. Of course he'd say that.

I'm worried that there is too much being done to present this as a partisan trial when in reality it is Republicans ignoring evidence that is in front of their faces, so it'll end up looking like 'both sides are bad' when there really is only one side that is blocking this.

I do hope Bolton chooses to speak out regardless of whether he's called as a witness or not, he's no friend of the Democrats and it sounds like what he's revealing in his new book is very bad for the Republican administration. Relying on a loathsome warhawk to restore a semblance of order to democracy is not ideal but I'll take what there is.

Posted by: Forever European 31st January 2020, 03:50 PM

The same senate under Mitch that blocked Obama for two years on EVERYTHING, including his constitutional right to pick a supreme court judge? That senate? Oh and the same Mitch who cackled on live tv about blocking Obama? That senate? Oh.

Also, Trump has admitted it. The evidence is there for all to see. Trump has bragged about obstruction of congress - you know, frustrsting the separation of powers and affecting the checks and balances of democracy, that sort of thing. That is one of the things he is um on trial for. He should be convicted. If this were a fair trial, he'd be gone.

Posted by: Crazy Chris 31st January 2020, 04:01 PM

It's thought Trump will be acquitted by the end of tomorrow.

Posted by: Forever European 31st January 2020, 04:02 PM

And it's thought that the democrats will bring new charges of impeachment over his other crimes once the sham trial votes x

Posted by: Crazy Chris 31st January 2020, 04:14 PM

All this won't make the Democrats look very good to the electorate. These attempts to get rid of Trump may just come back to bite them on the bum on 2nd November.

Posted by: Forever European 31st January 2020, 04:16 PM

Wrong! 75% of Americans want witnesses. Trump is guilty. He is worse than Nixon, no matter how much the right wing trolls LOLOLOL at the suggestion. Btw, you only laugh at it because he is the current right wing hope. In a few years, any Repuke behaviour will be waved away with: but he's not as corrupt as Trump LOL! Completely gaming the system.

Posted by: Jüpiter👑 31st January 2020, 07:23 PM

He's not long for this earth hopefully, although what damage he's done already.

Posted by: Suedehead2 31st January 2020, 07:32 PM

The Republicans tried to get rid of Clinton because he lied about a blow-job. Trump has attempted to get a foreign government to interfere in an election, using bribery if necessary. Which is the greater crime? And how does it compare with the orange thing trying to claim Obama wasn't born in Hawaii?

Posted by: Crazy Chris 31st January 2020, 09:15 PM

Trump is reportedly as fit as a fiddle. Sanders had a heart attack. Maybe you're getting confused.

Posted by: Forever European 31st January 2020, 09:43 PM

And so did Trump You don't get rushed to a physical and you also don't do a physical in 2 parts lol x

He also looks and sounds TERRIBLE. He is really unfit and healthy, your Trump.

Posted by: Crazy Chris 31st January 2020, 09:51 PM

The White House denies that he has ever had a heart attack. Do you know more than them? Why would they not admit it? Bernie did after all. He looks and sounds fine and ready for 4 more years.

Posted by: Suedehead2 31st January 2020, 10:00 PM

Because Sanders is vaguely honest whereas Trump is a big fat orange liar.

Posted by: Crazy Chris 31st January 2020, 10:02 PM

You don't like him or Boris. Are there any current world leaders that you do like?

Posted by: Forever European 31st January 2020, 10:46 PM

The white house releases hundreds of lies a week. It is corrupt as f***. He was RUSHED TO A 2ND PHYSICAL. That is bad. He is bright yellow, massive purple eye bags, blood shot eyes, slurred speech, etc. He's not healthy. Mentally he's even worse. Deranged.

Also we despise authoritarian clowns like trump and bojo. Sorry. It's a disgrace and an embarrassment they ever got elected.

Posted by: Crazy Chris 1st February 2020, 12:44 AM

Well I didn't elect Trump.

Posted by: Crazy Chris 1st February 2020, 01:22 AM

So no witnesses to be called then.

This is the latest timetable:

From Senators Barrasso and Blunt
4 or 5 Democratic amendment votes voted on tonight.
No weekend session.
Monday closing arguments on both sides
Senator floor speeches: Monday-Wednesday.
Acquittal vote: Wednesday afternoon.


The witnesses vote was 51 for and 49 against.

McConnell wanted the final verdict to be made tonight, but some of the more moderate Republicans wanted it moved to Wednesday, to allow them to explain on the Senate floor why they are voting to acquit. Trump also wanted the final vote to happen tonight, so he can gloat about his acquittal in his SOTU address on Tuesday. Ultimately it looks like Trump + McConnell backed down and the final vote will now be Wednesday after two days of closing arguments, etc.

Posted by: Iz~ 1st February 2020, 01:49 AM

Well, sounds like they've made it certain that no matter what you do, even if it's quite provably interfering in the democratic process, no president (if Republican) will ever be removed from office.

A sham and a farce. The Republican party are dictatorship-enabling fascists.

Posted by: Steve201 1st February 2020, 02:17 AM

The whole US impeachment process is t fit for purpose, let's be honest. It shouldn't be decided by politicians.

Posted by: vidcapper 1st February 2020, 07:30 AM

You want it done by an electoral college instead, perhaps?

Seriously though, if not by them, then who?

Posted by: *CENSORED* 1st February 2020, 07:47 AM

Tea!

Posted by: tommie 1st February 2020, 09:03 AM

Let's be honest here - if it was the other way around the Democrats wouldn't be voting to impeach their President. It's the issue of going through two chambers where both have a majority in each. Politicans don't tend to be very pragmatic in general and will vote what'll help their cause best. Then you have the fact that the US is still hanging on to an outdated 230+ year old constitution like it's a religious text to help decide everything on.

Posted by: Suedehead2 1st February 2020, 09:15 AM

I’m sure even now there are people charged with murder wondering whether they can prevent the prosecution calling any witnesses in their trial.

Posted by: Iz~ 1st February 2020, 09:20 AM

No, there's a lot you can criticise the Democratic party on but you'll rarely find them playing unfair, often to their detriment. In the reverse situation there would have been a lot more 'moderate' Democrats willing to hear witnesses, so they'd have heard those, and that would have convinced even more and likely remove, Democrats are still playing the game of gentleman's politics that saw Nixon resign and rightfully acquit Bill Clinton as his offense was so minor. Republicans have stopped doing that because they realise that tightly banding together under 'my side is right no question' creates a stronger voting bloc and an easier time of winning elections.

Just look at how the recent Supreme Court nominees have been done to see how the parties are different. Obama nominated a milquetoast compromise candidate in Garland despite the Republicans saying they would not accept any Democratic nominee 'in an election year', and all Obama did in response was to create an ineffective shame counter. Then the instant the Republicans get into power, they confirm their candidate in double quick time and shove through a second on a timely retirement despite a highly publicised court case that cast great doubt on his (Kavanaugh) character. The Republicans know that holding control of the Supreme Court is politically valuable, so they don't waste time being weak about it, while the Democrats value appearing to have the high ground. I have no doubt that if a current Democratic President had done what Trump has done, there would have been enough Democrat Senators to voting to remove him.

Posted by: Iz~ 1st February 2020, 09:28 AM

In fact the Democrats are so good at being manipulated by bad faith actors that I would think it highly likely that the next Democratic President (if a moderate) to suffer a scandal will resign 'to show the American people they are better than Trump', immediately before the next version of a Republican terror president wins at the ballot box.

Posted by: tommie 1st February 2020, 11:23 AM

The point wasn't as to whose worse (though I think it's a bit of a mistake to think there's such a thing as "Honest Abe" politicians), but as the entire US system for handling this sort of thing is completely f***ed. As long as the President has majority in one of the chambers/houses the probability of them being impeached is basically miniscule barring an actual genocide. And that's not even get into the complete lack of procedure where they can deny basic things as getting to call witnesses at all - sure, at regular trials lawyers try to stop witnesses from testifying for various of legal reasons, but there's no such thing as completely stopping the prosecution from even calling them.

At the end of the day, the biggest issue for the US is that their constitution is 230+ years old and wasn't ever intended to handle issues in the 2020s, yet it's treated like a holy document that can't be changed despite most modern day countries who have one try to keep theirs up to date.

Posted by: Iz~ 1st February 2020, 11:51 AM

I agree with you on the constitution point, it was never designed to handle people being more loyal to their party over the country. It does need to be altered to combat the backslide away from a democracy that this presidency has caused.

Posted by: Crazy Chris 1st February 2020, 02:05 PM

Has anyone heard of this. Some US political experts think that a President should not be impeached, even if he's done something wrong, if he believes he was right to do it or if he thought it was for the good of the country.

Posted by: Crazy Chris 1st February 2020, 02:07 PM

The Dems just want to try and remove Trump this way as they don't think any of their candidates can do so at the ballot box in November. There you have it in a nutshell.

Posted by: *CENSORED* 1st February 2020, 02:25 PM

President: omg i thought it was the right thing to dewww



Everyone: okay go back to work don't kill anyone else lol

Posted by: EU Boy Weeyals 1st February 2020, 02:30 PM

The end justifies the means does it?

Posted by: Iz~ 1st February 2020, 02:32 PM

Bit too simplistic of an explanation (as you are wont to do). The DNC top end undoubtedly thinks that putting up a moderate candidate like Biden will make the population 'see sense', as flawed as that obviously is, that's the liberal orthodoxy for you. Plus if this impeachment was a sham case, it involves their candidate to a potentially detrimental extent. I have no doubt that the allegations are real and they warrant a removal.

In fact I would bet the DNC thinks that whatever candidate they put up they will beat Trump, unless it's the one candidate (Sanders) who's actually doing the best in head-to-heads against Trump because what does energy matter in a campaign, they'll focus on his supposed radical nature without realising that promising a departure from political wrangling and populism is actually becoming a vote winner. Their participation in the impeachment process I have no trouble believing is them thinking they're doing the best for democracy, at least they're trying.

Posted by: Forever European 1st February 2020, 04:56 PM

Trump has forever cheapened the presidency, and that stupid defence of, anything the president does is in thr national interest, is the worst "argument" I have ever heard. It is basically dictatorship spiel at this point. Democracy has been bought and gamed by oligarchs, and we have lost it.

He should have been removed over this, but we all knew - even common sense, as much as he tried not to admit it so he could pretend to be shocked - that this trial was a sham that would end up protecting a sham president. He is worse than Nixon.

Posted by: Suedehead2 1st February 2020, 05:24 PM

Whereas the Republicans' motivation from trying to remove Clinton for lying about a blow job was...?

Posted by: Crazy Chris 1st February 2020, 05:35 PM

Clinton was impeached in 1998 during his second term so couldn't stand again in 2000.

Posted by: Suedehead2 1st February 2020, 05:55 PM

I'm well aware of that. However, only someone completely deluded could claim that the move was not an attempt to do something they failed to do at the ballot box.

Posted by: Suedehead2 2nd February 2020, 01:03 PM

It is now being reported that Trump's lawyers have, over the last few months, contributed to the campaign funds of several Republican senators. We can, therefore, add bribing the jury to the list of things that are, apparently, acceptable in an impeachment trial.

Posted by: Steve201 2nd February 2020, 01:13 PM

I'm not sure but politicians just are partisan and create this type of situation and ridicule the situation.

Posted by: Suedehead2 2nd February 2020, 01:17 PM

The requirement for a two-thirds majority was clearly intended to guard against a purely partisan attempt to remove a president from office. However, it was also reliant on senators acting with integrity rather than simply adopting an attitude of "my president, right or wrong". The Republicans' refusal to listen to the evidence against Trump makes a mockery of the whole process.

Posted by: vidcapper 2nd February 2020, 01:57 PM

Of course, even if they had, they might not have found him guilty.

Posted by: Iz~ 2nd February 2020, 04:16 PM

The prevailing attitude/excuse from the Republicans is more along the lines of 'yes he's probably guilty, but we don't believe it was an impeachable offense'.

Posted by: Crazy Chris 2nd February 2020, 05:38 PM

They're probably right too.

Posted by: Forever European 2nd February 2020, 05:50 PM

They're wrong. Sorry. Your belived blotus is guilty and the most corrupt president in the history of the united states. Sorry. Mwaa.

Posted by: Crazy Chris 2nd February 2020, 05:53 PM

Except when he's cleared this week the history books will see him as proved innocent.

Posted by: Forever European 2nd February 2020, 05:56 PM

Ah ah ah! Stop sealioning us. We have said for MONTHS that it would be a sham trial. The repukes basically said so themselves. Refusing to listen to evidence means they can't clear him. He isn't exonerated. That can't be done without witnesses. He will go down in history books as guilty, but let off the hook by a corrupt bipartisan senate just interested in playing politics, rather than putting the country first. So! Once again for the sealion TROLL: he cannot be PROVED innocent by a sham trial which refused witnesses. The end. He is NOT exonerated by this. We told you over and over and over again, and we said WRLL in advsnce yiu were just running in with every update of a sham trial to gloat and cheer at the end of it saying, yes he's innocent! Youd enied this. Yet here you are, doing it already!

Oh, and by the way, the evidence proves he did it. And if he were innocent, he wouldn't brag about stopping witnesses and concealing 40 documents about it. Oh, btw, that is OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE, another impeachable offence xxxx

Are you a Russian troll??

Posted by: Tawdry Hepburn 2nd February 2020, 06:26 PM

I think it's more a case of they're completely aware it's an impeachable offence, but that's immaterial to them. The whole thing is disgusting and it sickens me.

Posted by: *CENSORED* 2nd February 2020, 07:11 PM

"Proved" sounds like they orange thing's lawyers are actually doing anything.

He's far from "innocent" and that IS already proven. This is why Republicans blocked the evidence and witnesses. Regardless he will always remain impeached in those history books you're talking about. 💖

Posted by: vidcapper 3rd February 2020, 06:19 AM

If he's reelected this year, that will be the people's judgement on impeachment though.

Posted by: Iz~ 3rd February 2020, 06:29 AM

As general elections always have myriad issues, it would be very misleading to base the November 2020 result as a judgement on the impeachment process.

Posted by: vidcapper 3rd February 2020, 07:29 AM

True, but his re-election would still be an endorsement of him in general.

Posted by: Forever European 3rd February 2020, 07:56 AM

Not so. It's a first past the post system in which the Repukes have won the popular vote only once in 30 years x

Posted by: vidcapper 3rd February 2020, 09:15 AM

BTW your inbox is full, so it might be a good idea to thin it out a little.

Regards,

Posted by: Crazy Chris 3rd February 2020, 09:35 AM

Trump just made a gaffe. He tweeted out congratulations to the Kansas City Chiefs for winning the Superbowl, saying they were a credit to the great state of Kansas

The Kansas City Chiefs play in Kansas City, Missouri, not Kansas

It took 11 minutes for someone to point out the mistake, delete the tweet and resend it with the correct state

Posted by: Tawdry Hepburn 3rd February 2020, 09:49 AM

He genuinely is thick as mince. Jesus Harold Christ.

Posted by: vidcapper 3rd February 2020, 10:15 AM

I didn't know that either, perhaps I should throw my hat in the ring too.

Posted by: *CENSORED* 3rd February 2020, 11:08 AM

you're not the US president tho

i wonder if he can name all the states too

Posted by: Crazy Chris 3rd February 2020, 04:10 PM

I can. Can you?

Posted by: *CENSORED* 3rd February 2020, 10:14 PM

i guess that makes you more qualified than the cheeto

Posted by: vidcapper 4th February 2020, 06:28 AM

I doubt more than a tiny % of Americans could.

I remember a scene in Friends where they tried to name all the States, and failed miserably.

Posted by: Silas EU Later 4th February 2020, 07:01 AM

Naming every state and all the state capitals is something they learn in elementary school.


The only surprise so far is that the vote to allow witnesses was actually close. This whole affair is a sham with a predetermined outcome

Posted by: vidcapper 4th February 2020, 07:17 AM

1. Which is probably why most can't remember them - I can remember little from when I was 6-10 years old.

2. The trial process was corrupted from the start - clearly politically partisan on both sides.

Posted by: Crazy Chris 4th February 2020, 07:43 AM

Sacramento is one that certainly a lot of non-Americans don't know.

Posted by: *CENSORED* 4th February 2020, 08:22 AM

there are plenty of capitals which are not the largest cities. California is just one example

Posted by: Tawdry Hepburn 4th February 2020, 11:30 AM

A small percentage of Americans even believe Buzz Lightyear was the first man to land on the moon, so nothing surprises me.

Posted by: Crazy Chris 5th February 2020, 02:31 PM

Senate vote expected at 4pm ET so 9pm GMT.

Posted by: A Capella Sally 5th February 2020, 02:34 PM

Republicans will acquit just like we told you waaay back when. They don't care. It was all partisan. None of us care about this sham trial ... except feom you.

Posted by: Crazy Chris 5th February 2020, 02:35 PM

Strange that Sky News are talking about it a lot today.

Posted by: A Capella Sally 5th February 2020, 02:43 PM

Oh wow, a 24 hour news organisation is reporting on something to fill its time?! No shit! Again: sham trial. He was aaaaalways going ro be acquitted. Always. But he is guilty. He isn't exonerated. The evidence is there. And he obstructed evidence about Ukraine, bragged about obstructing it, and obstruction was one of the 2 things they impeached him for. Okay? All clear? xxx No one cares but you.

Posted by: Crazy Chris 5th February 2020, 02:49 PM

Impeachment seems to have made him stronger though. His approval rating has gone up! All US commentators say his SOTU address was very good, focussing on the economy, the economy, the economy, and that he'll be very hard to beat. I for one hope he gets another 4 years. America and the world needs a strong President.

Posted by: *CENSORED* 5th February 2020, 03:00 PM

more children need caging and he hasn't overturned all of Obama's policies after all!

Posted by: Suedehead2 5th February 2020, 08:34 PM

A truly strong leader wouldn't see the need to keep lying all the time. He also wouldn't need to get foreign governments to interfere in his re-election campaign or to try bribing them to do so.

Posted by: Crazy Chris 5th February 2020, 09:21 PM

Donald Trump NOT GUILTY 52-48. The verdict speaks for itself so I'll say no more.

Not guilty on both articles.

Posted by: Silas EU Later 5th February 2020, 09:30 PM

Yeah it says that a Republican crossed the aisle which is one more vote to convict than I actually expected we'd get. Otherwise it says the Republicans are a bunch of crooks and conspired with the haunted satsuma to railroad this clearance to keep control on power at the cost of american democracy.

Posted by: coi 5th February 2020, 09:48 PM

I believe that one Republican was Mitt Romney

Posted by: A Capella Sally 5th February 2020, 10:00 PM

I rrpeat x

It was a ducking sham f***ing trial and everyone not in his party plus one IN HIS f***ING PARTY voted against that horrendous pos. God I knee tou would do this. He is not f***ing exonerated mkwayyy? Great x

Posted by: cantthinkofaname 5th February 2020, 10:12 PM

lmfao at someone actually thinking Trump being acquitted means he's innocent

Posted by: Tawdry Hepburn 5th February 2020, 10:12 PM

EXACTLY!

Everybody knows this is WRONG, whether they admit it or not.

Posted by: A Capella Sally 5th February 2020, 10:16 PM

We have repeated to him for MONTHS that acquittal does NOT mean exoneration and especially not when the EVIDENCE CLEARLY STATES HE DID IT ANS HE WAS ACQUITTED BY HIS OWN PARTY!! We have said time and time again he would not be acquitted, but here he is, rushing in first to say he's innocent!! Trolling 101.

Posted by: Bré 5th February 2020, 10:33 PM

Mitt Romney displaying half of a backbone! Means nothing of course but I'm surprised x

Posted by: A Capella Sally 5th February 2020, 10:36 PM

Utah hates Trump - haaaates him. It would probably turn blue if it's Trump vs Bernie. Romney's a senator there. It guarantees him reelection to thd senate for years to come.

Posted by: Crazy Chris 5th February 2020, 10:58 PM

At least Trump has a sense of humour.



https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EQC2l5VWsAEWHmg?format=jpg&name=small

Posted by: Steve201 5th February 2020, 11:07 PM

Ahahahabaha yes clearly he won the vote so he's not guilty!!

Posted by: cantthinkofaname 5th February 2020, 11:30 PM

To the ones who don't understand why this result says proves absolutely nothing: Think of it this way. You're being accused of a crime. The jury consists of 7 people you know who love you - these are essentially your family and friends - and 4 people who dislike you and you know they do because they don't hide it.

When the result is announced and you're "shockingly" cleared of all charges what's more telling: the fact that you are acquitted of the crime given that a majority is needed to convict you or the fact that one of your best friends voted to convict you despite everyone knowing the vote was never going to go in your accuser's favor?

Posted by: cantthinkofaname 5th February 2020, 11:33 PM

https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2019/02/17/trump-attack-saturday-night-live-reactions/2899634002/

Posted by: *CENSORED* 5th February 2020, 11:46 PM

Don’t bother with Chris really. Orange thing can murder a child, confess and Chris will still make excuses for IT.

Posted by: Iz~ 6th February 2020, 02:25 AM

Romney's in the unusual situation of being near enough the Second Coming for the Mormons in Utah. Though Utah's Republican to the bone they're more loyal to their own Mormons than anyone else which means that he's basically free to do as he likes and his voting base won't care. If there was one Republican doing the right thing it'd have been him.

I hope that Susan Collins not doing the right thing has now cost her her Maine seat.

Posted by: vidcapper 6th February 2020, 05:44 AM

That infamous margin, too...



I agree that being acquitted doesn't mean he didn't do it - that's the same as any trial, but in the eyes of the law, he *has* been cleared.

BTW, have you cleared space in your inbox yet, Michael?

Posted by: Iz~ 6th February 2020, 06:30 AM

And in the eyes of the law, he now has free reign to do whatever he pleases.

https://theweek.com/articles/893884

Posted by: vidcapper 6th February 2020, 07:19 AM

*******************

I guess it's up to the electorate to try and remove him, then.

Posted by: Crazy Chris 6th February 2020, 07:30 AM

Trump described on GMB as being like Freddie Krueger. "You think he's down and dead and he rises up again"

Posted by: Iz~ 6th February 2020, 07:36 AM

You put a great faith in electoral politics to not be undermined by the same power-hungry actors that saw this go through.

This entire charge was about electoral rigging. They got away with it. They're going to rig the election.

Posted by: Crazy Chris 6th February 2020, 07:52 AM

They don't need to rig it. The Democrats have no-one who can inspire the electorate. Two old men of nearly 80 lead the betting to get the nomination. Trump will be-re-elected and could be a landslide.

It's been pretty much accepted that if Bernie becomes the Democratic candidate in the General election, he'll lose Florida.

Cubans and Venezuelans in Florida will not take too kindly towards Bernie's type of ideology.

Dems don't need Florida to win the election...but it would be nice and harder without it. Biden or Warren could take it.

Posted by: Iz~ 6th February 2020, 08:03 AM

Two old men, like Trump then. The first of those old men has a tag line of 'Not Me. Us', because it's not about him as a person, it's about inspiring a movement that has his supporters extremely fired up and enthusiastic right now, enough to break the record for individual donors to a presidential campaign by miles. The other came 4th in his first test of "electability" and will probably drop out in two weeks.

Posted by: Iz~ 6th February 2020, 08:08 AM

Source? The polls aren't showing that, the latest Trump vs Sanders one for Florida even has Bernie ahead 47-53. But in truth I think Florida is lost to Trump no matter who the nominee is, I think it's more important to ensure a clean sweep of the northern Midwest states (bar Indiana) and Sanders is very well placed to do that.

Posted by: Crazy Chris 6th February 2020, 08:19 AM

Do you honesly think Trump can be beaten though? Not that you want him to be beaten. I'd be gobsmacked if he isn't re-elected.

Posted by: Iz~ 6th February 2020, 08:31 AM

So, no source for Florida definitely lost for Bernie but better for other Democrats then.

Yes, Trump can be beaten. He can also win. This is a very open election, a uniquely unpopular president going up against a Democratic party that may be disunited now but will be united behind one candidate for the general. He was barely elected the first time around and back then was an unknown quantity that got him anti-establishment votes. He has been down in polls and has had high disapproval ratings for ages.

He has to his advantage a brilliant PR machine and an army of sycophants ready to excuse anything he does, with a media not ready to stand up to him because though they are meant to be ideologically opposed to him, they've been loving this era, great for news clicks and performative outrage.

Nothing is certain yet. But you're definitely wrong on one thing, the Democrats do have a candidate that can inspire the electorate, Sanders. It remains to be seen if the DNC at large will let him run.

Posted by: Crazy Chris 6th February 2020, 08:33 AM

Was a US newspaper site that I read it on last night. Will try to find it again.

Posted by: Crazy Chris 6th February 2020, 08:40 AM

Can't see how they can deny him the Nomination if he gets more delegates. Only at a contested convention where the Super delegates could keep him out.

Posted by: cantthinkofaname 6th February 2020, 09:43 AM

I would honestly be very happy with either Sanders or Warren as the candidate but can someone tell me how she measures up against Trump in the polls?

Posted by: *CENSORED* 6th February 2020, 09:50 AM

Trump is merely 4 and 5 years younger than Biden/Sanders respectively. Hardly an advantage and I am struggling to think how age has anything to do with what is being talked about. :/

Posted by: Tawdry Hepburn 6th February 2020, 10:00 AM

It's official, 52-48 is the ratio of evil.

Posted by: Iz~ 6th February 2020, 10:21 AM

She's a little weaker on average than Biden or Sanders but better than Buttigieg, but at this point, her and Buttigieg haven't got the name recognition to be doing better.

I think she's the least likely of the top 4 to now get the nomination though. Buttigieg can trade off of his """"Iowa win""" for a while, Sanders I believe is now the odds-on favourite and Biden will be using the smoke around Iowa to survive until he can pull out a state win or two if he's going to have a chance. I find it hard to see Warren moving past any of them.

Posted by: Crazy Chris 17th February 2020, 12:14 AM

I don't think singer and actress Bette Midler likes Trump. What do you reckon?

Her Tweet:

"You, Donald, are a 5’10”, 300 pound, lift-wearing, sack of stinking, steaming garbage. Your thoughts are garbage, your actions are garbage, your buildings are REAL garbage, your fortune is garbage, and everything and everyone in your orbit is garbage. You just have that effect."


Well, not much to add to that is there.

Posted by: Crazy Chris 17th February 2020, 12:17 AM

Anyway there's no way he's 300 pounds as that would be 21.42 stone according to Google. Can't see him weighing so much.

Posted by: _____________ 17th February 2020, 01:44 PM

Nice justification and a reasoned response. I totally agree, 250lbs at the absolute MOST. What do you think of the rest of the tweet lol

Posted by: Crazy Chris 17th February 2020, 03:43 PM

Well Bette seems to like the word garbage.

Posted by: Limp Brexit 17th February 2020, 04:58 PM

Are we really arguing over someone's EXACT weight? Also, use kilos!