I suppose you're right. Some people don't think that a sitting present attempting to extort an ally into helping with his reelection effort by holding up military aid that country needs is a particularly big deal.Originally Posted by LDAHL
I suppose you're right. Some people don't think that a sitting present attempting to extort an ally into helping with his reelection effort by holding up military aid that country needs is a particularly big deal.
I am of the school of thought that no matter how bad things are they can always get worse. I don’t happen to think it’s outside the realm of possibility that an equally dreadful or worse alternative to Trump may emerge from the Democrat’s national convention.
If the Democrat is reasonably superior to Trump, I will vote for that candidate.
If the Democrat is clearly worse, I will hold my nose and vote for Trump.
If the two choices seem about equally awful, I will do what I did last time and vote Libertarian.
I try not to allow moralistic fervor to interfere with rational calculation.
Especially once that pesky "high crimes and misdemeanors" wording from the constitution has been rendered meaningless.
I don’t think things could get any worse so nothing could persuade me to vote for the orange moron.
I think the problem with putting a veneer of legal phrasing on what is essentially a political crusade that commenced prior to the last inauguration is that people tend to begin believing their own propaganda in terms of who is being stonily objective and who is grinding an axe. It tends to trivialize the process down to another item in the partisan bag of tricks.
Has it's meaning changed since 1998 when the House Judiciary Committee voted along party lines on President Clinton's articles of impeachment? Or maybe since 1999 when every Senate Democrat voted 'Not Guilty' on each of the two articles coming out of the House?
That seemed to be a pretty partisan trial so I think justice was best served by an acquittal. I think the same applies this time, don't you?
"Things should be made as simple as possible, but not one bit simpler." ~ Albert Einstein
I'm impressed at how consistently republicans have avoided trying to actually defend trump's (admittedly indefensible) actions and have stuck with the "it's just a partisan witchhunt" defense.
It only works because the Democrats jumped the gun and started working on impeachment before he actually assumed the office, 'partisan witch hunt' just seems to fit.
"Things should be made as simple as possible, but not one bit simpler." ~ Albert Einstein
Alan, I can accept that you are a Conservative and support Trump. Such is indeed your right and you owe no one any justification for your choice here. Given all the proceeding, and given that you.support Trump, here's an honest, non-snarky question for you. How do you justify Trump's now infamous call with the President of the Ukraine? I find it utterly fascinating that Conservatives are willing to overlook this BOTOH are OK with holding citizenship in the one country on this planet that locks up more of it's citizens than any other. My point here is even application of the standard. Trump breaks the law? There need to be consequences otherwise the Constitution is but toilet paper. Seriously. Rob
What makes you think that?
"Things should be made as simple as possible, but not one bit simpler." ~ Albert Einstein
There are currently 3 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 3 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote