Live Thread: Impeachment Acquital

[Cyber Liberty]

In the same way, you could praise the Gang of Eight.

Nope.  The "Gang of Eight" was 8/535ths of a branch of government, while a SCOTUS Justice is 1/9.  I detested them, but they were far less of a voice than a Sotomayor.

And that's the choice we get.  Elect a Rat in 2020, and we'll have Justice O'Bastard.  And don't try to sell me the notion that O'Bastard would not be worse than Gorsuch.

[Cyber Liberty]

Exactly my point.

So I guess the difference is just where the football goes.  We either have it pulled away, or we get it rammed up our collective butt.  I think I'd give up too, if I thought that was the choice.

[Chosen Daughter]

@Right_in_Virginia

You are wasting your time. I believe she is a group of DNC people posing as a Christian female conservative in an effort to weaken Trump and other Republican chances for re-election. The Dims are both desperate and evil,which pretty much defines THIS "Christian Daughter",who probably drinks Scotch and smokes cigars.

Listen to yourself!  The Christian hater.  But you don't hate Trumps Christian brand do you?  The Jerry Falwell Jr. Types that are a mouthpiece for Vladimir Putin.  Please read his twitter if you don't believe me. 

https://twitter.com/JerryFalwellJr/status/1023267457304326145

And he is getting well deserved history lessons probably from liberals.  Can't find a single thing about God on his twitter page. All Trump and Russia.
Or Paula White who is the judge of Christians who don't go all in for Trump.  She's ready to damn them all to hell. 

I saw the other day on @TomSea tag line he had a link to Rubio's twitter.  I had never looked before but if you want to see a man of God look there.  That is what a man of God posts in his twitter.

The other day I was nearly ready to say that I might be able to cast my vote for Trump.  Because like all of you, I am not a Democrat and do not want Socialism.  That seems to be what Pence and Trump realize is the winning ticket.  The one phrase every Conservative knows.  "We will never be a Socialist country".  And then I did it.  I listened to Trumps post acquittal presser.  I saw that he was hand picking Senators without others even getting a chance.  I saw that this Josh Hawley was courting Bannon for his Populist Party.  You know, the "Workers Party".  I also saw Trump admit that he has been a politician for a very long time.

And unlike most of you I can't ignore the lies.  You all want to pretend that Trump had nothing to do with his own "witch hunt".  He didn't choose his Russian Oligarch  Manafort by mistake.  No, they have been business associates for years. (1980).  So when you run with the liberal crowd who also have ties to Russia and Ukraine what can you expect?  Trump started this all (Mueller investigation) by having ties to Russia. Then he went on to poke the liberal hornet nest using Giuliani and his corrupt criminal friends Parnas and Fruman to start a political battle.

Poor Trump.

Not one of you would like to admit that Trumps liberal and Russian associates have been his own downfall.  Even the ones who spied on him in the White House.  (Amorosa).  And his other criminal lawyer friend Cohen.   And he goes around trying to destroy people's careers if they don't get on full board.  (Bolton and Sessions).

And I would also like to mention that Susan Collins is receiving death threats for voting to acquit.  She really deserves all of you trashing her doesn't she?

And the constant trashing of @Victoria33 , @roamer_1 , @Absalom .

Well I posted the article where Steve Bannon describes how Trump has been planning his "populist party" for 25-30 years.  Is that when he finally registered to vote?  Maybe he decided that he had to be the Great in America.  Well I am a proud Conservative.  I don't pal around with criminals and Russian pawns and criminals and excuse me for pointing it out.  Trump is a politician.  No outsider to lobbying and that is how he met his criminal friends.  That is how Giuliani has connection to his criminal friends also. 

Have a good day.

[roamer_1]

Nope.  The "Gang of Eight" was 8/535ths of a branch of government, while a SCOTUS Justice is 1/9.  I detested them, but they were far less of a voice than a Sotomayor.

And that's the choice we get.  Elect a Rat in 2020, and we'll have Justice O'Bastard.  And don't try to sell me the notion that O'Bastard would not be worse than Gorsuch.

Gang of Eight stopped any Conservative wins. Positioned right over the fulcrum. Kennedy did the same thing.

[roamer_1]

So I guess the difference is just where the football goes.  We either have it pulled away, or we get it rammed up our collective butt.  I think I'd give up too, if I thought that was the choice.

That IS the choice. What makes you think I have given up?

[Cyber Liberty]

The other day I was nearly ready to say that I might be able to cast my vote for Trump.

 

Not buying it.  You said the same thing about killing a terrorist responsible for the deaths of at least 600 American soldiers, until Trump said something you didn't like, then it was back to "Trump should not have done it."

[Cyber Liberty]

Gang of Eight stopped any Conservative wins. Positioned right over the fulcrum. Kennedy did the same thing.

Meanwhile, Souter and Ginsburg were never in doubt.  So it boils down to "No" or "Maybe."  Very few "Yeses."

[Cyber Liberty]

That IS the choice. What makes you think I have given up?

I dunno....maybe it's the "There is no difference between Democrats and Republicans" part.   

[Chosen Daughter]

Not buying it.  You said the same thing about killing a terrorist responsible for the deaths of at least 600 American soldiers, until Trump said something you didn't like, then it was back to "Trump should not have done it."

I said I am not shedding tears the terrorist is dead.  But why did Trump have to lie about it?  You obviously love to be lied to.

[skeeter]

I said I am not shedding tears the terrorist is dead.  But why did Trump have to lie about it?  You obviously love to be lied to.

The left loves to characterize opposing perspectives as 'lies'. We should know better than to follow suite.

[Cyber Liberty]

I said I am not shedding tears the terrorist is dead.  But why did Trump have to lie about it?  You obviously love to be lied to.

Bullshit.  You said at the time what changed your mind was Trump's suggestion that cultural sites could be hit, as Dresden was.  Any alleged "lies" about it were all after you already "changed your mind" that maybe Trump did a good thing. 

And you can take the "you must like being lied to" and shove it.

[roamer_1]

I dunno....maybe it's the "There is no difference between Democrats and Republicans" part.   

There isn't any difference.
Serve the dems and get socialism through the UN
Serve the pubs and get NWO 3rd way socialism through the corps.
Pick your master.

I pick neither. I don't know what that would be a surprise. And it does not mean I have given up.

[Cyber Liberty]

The left loves to characterize opposing perspectives as 'lies'. We should know better than to follow suite.

I've just about had it with the resident leftist in practice who claims to be more"right" than any of us in theory.

[Cyber Liberty]

There isn't any difference.
Serve the dems and get socialism through the UN
Serve the pubs and get NWO 3rd way socialism through the corps.
Pick your master.

I pick neither. I don't know what that would be a surprise. And it does not mean I have given up.

In practical terms, you may have. 

[skeeter]

I've just about had it with the resident leftist in practice who claims to be more"right" than any of us in theory.

The schtick grows tiresome.

[Smokin Joe]

Nope.  The "Gang of Eight" was 8/535ths of a branch of government, while a SCOTUS Justice is 1/9.  I detested them, but they were far less of a voice than a Sotomayor.

And that's the choice we get.  Elect a Rat in 2020, and we'll have Justice O'Bastard.  And don't try to sell me the notion that O'Bastard would not be worse than Gorsuch.

Well, I prefer justices who have at least read the Constitution.

Roberts was seriously compromised to make such egregious moves on the ACA as rewriting the penalty into a tax on breathing, something we repeatedly heard it was NOT, and in rewriting a bit of legislation (not his job) in order to rule it constitutional. There were other problems no serious student of the Constitution would not take issue with, so his motivation is neither that of ignorance, nor likely of partisanship, but leverage exerted by those who wanted to keep the ACA intact. Apparently that includes people from both sides of the aisle, because despite EOs mitigating the worst of it, it's still there.

[roamer_1]

In practical terms, you may have.

No, I have not. There is nothing practical in supporting either one.

I choose liberty, and the Conservatism that defends it.

[Cyber Liberty]

The schtick grows tiresome.

The rule of "no bans for what's said" still stands. 

[Cyber Liberty]

Well, I prefer justices who have at least read the Constitution.

Roberts was seriously compromised to make such egregious moves on the ACA as rewriting the penalty into a tax on breathing, something we repeatedly heard it was NOT, and in rewriting a bit of legislation (not his job) in order to rule it constitutional. There were other problems no serious student of the Constitution would not take issue with, so his motivation is neither that of ignorance, nor likely of partisanship, but leverage exerted by those who wanted to keep the ACA intact. Apparently that includes people from both sides of the aisle, because despite EOs mitigating the worst of it, it's still there.

I remember the rule I learnt long ago in the corporate world:  "One 'Aw Shit' will erase 100 'Atta Boys'."  Roberts wasn't a complete failure, but we remember well that one time he stabbed the Nation in the back.

[Bigun]

Well, I prefer justices who have at least read the Constitution.

Roberts was seriously compromised to make such egregious moves on the ACA as rewriting the penalty into a tax on breathing, something we repeatedly heard it was NOT, and in rewriting a bit of legislation (not his job) in order to rule it constitutional. There were other problems no serious student of the Constitution would not take issue with, so his motivation is neither that of ignorance, nor likely of partisanship, but leverage exerted by those who wanted to keep the ACA intact. Apparently that includes people from both sides of the aisle, because despite EOs mitigating the worst of it, it's still there.

IIRC the government's own lawyers argued repeatedly before the court that the penalty was NOT a tax.   Could be wrong but I don't think so. @Smokin Joe

[Cyber Liberty]

No, I have not. There is nothing practical in supporting either one.

I choose liberty, and the Conservatism that defends it.

I think that last part is true of the majority of Briefers, we only differ on how to get there.   

[Smokin Joe]

There isn't any difference.
Serve the dems and get socialism through the UN
Serve the pubs and get NWO 3rd way socialism through the corps.
Pick your master.

I pick neither. I don't know what that would be a surprise. And it does not mean I have given up.

I agree, but we have lots of dreck from lesser evils to trudge through before the masses even get a clue what Liberty is, and why it is desirable. IF that happens, it likely will not in our lifetimes, short of a cataclysmic return to a concept most are wholly ignorant of.

Those of us who remember the relative lack of encumbrance of the RKBA before the GCA of '68 even have trouble imagining what it was like before the NFA of '34. That's how far we need to go, and it, short of tremendous upheaval, will simply not happen overnight. It has taken 160+ years to get this far from the Republic Dr. Franklin admonished us to keep, and it will be a long road back, especially with the Communists and other totalitarians brainwashing for generations.

Only for that reason can I see that transition of lesser evils, so long as each is less than that previous, before finally breaking through into the light.

Would I eminently prefer a wave of epiphany sweep over the collective American psyche and the demand shift to Liberty, not slavery? Oh, dear Jesus, yes!
But short of Divine intervention, I do not believe it will happen that way.
Still, The Almighty uses what tools He will, imperfect people to do great things, and by their fruits shall we know them.

Ever strive for better, but we fight with the army we have.

[Cyber Liberty]

IIRC the government's own lawyers argued repeatedly before the court that the penalty was NOT a tax.   Could be wrong but I don't think so. @Smokin Joe

You recall correctly.  The argument Roberts used to justify O'Bastardcare was never argued in Court, therefore our side was denied the opportunity to argue against it.  It would be like a Jury returning a verdict of "Guilty of Murder" when the original charge was "Burglary."  Murder wasn't even charged.

[Smokin Joe]

IIRC the government's own lawyers argued repeatedly before the court that the penalty was NOT a tax.   Could be wrong but I don't think so. @Smokin Joe

The architects of that abomination repeatedly countered the claims of taxing people for merely being alive with the mantra that it was a penalty and not a tax.

I heard Bernie today on the radio harping that millions were without health insurance.

Well, who in the >bleep< does he think made it that way? I HAD health insurance before the Damnedocrats started messing with it.

[Bigun]

You recall correctly.  The argument Roberts used to justify O'Bastardcare was never argued in Court, therefore our side was denied the opportunity to argue against it.  It would be like a Jury returning a verdict of "Guilty of Murder" when the original charge was "Burglary."  Murder wasn't even charged.

  Exactly right @Cyber Liberty