MAGAThread XVIII: The Authority Is Total

[Gormwood]

*shrugs* it was expected.

Maybe a reason for the rush vote?

https://www.cnn.com/2020/02/01/politics ... index.html

Anyhow.......

Doesn’t this administration know that you don’t tell everyone that you have committed a crime and you are withholding evidence? Seriously. John Oliver was right this isn’t watergate it’s stupid watergate

They did it because they knew they could get away with it and their base will vote for them no matter what.

[Thermodolia]

Doesn’t this administration know that you don’t tell everyone that you have committed a crime and you are withholding evidence? Seriously. John Oliver was right this isn’t watergate it’s stupid watergate

They did it because they knew they could get away with it and their base will vote for them no matter what.

Did they forget that some 70% of the population wanted the witnesses or that 51% of the people want Trump gone? Seriously this isn’t going to help them. Especially if the democrats continue to bring it up which they will.

[Gormwood]

They did it because they knew they could get away with it and their base will vote for them no matter what.

Did they forget that some 70% of the population wanted the witnesses or that 51% of the people want Trump gone? Seriously this isn’t going to help them. Especially if the democrats continue to bring it up which they will.

And Clinton won the popular vote. Either means jack shit in American politics.

[Spirit of Hope]

Now, on a more moral level, what did Trump do wrong?

He illegally withheld military aid to an ally in the middle of a war, in order to force that ally to announce a criminal investigation of a domestic political rival. When caught President Trump then lied to Congress and the public, all while refusing to cooperate with the Congressional investigation and attempting to block witnesses and documents from being released.

[Gormwood]

Now, on a more moral level, what did Trump do wrong?

He illegally withheld military aid to an ally in the middle of a war, in order to force that ally to announce a criminal investigation of a domestic political rival. When caught President Trump then lied to Congress and the public, all while refusing to cooperate with the Congressional investigation and attempting to block witnesses and documents from being released.

And the defense went from denying it happened to daring the Democrats do something about it. Clearly a sign of innocence.

[Cannot think of a name]

Hmm, impeachment. Well, since I am incapable of staying away from expressing my thoughts, I guess I'll say what I think about Trump's impeachment here.

Not only is it morally wrong, it is also a terrible idea politically. The only two presidents to be impeached in the past (NOT Richard Nixon; he resigned first) were not convicted from office. Also, when Bill Clinton was impeached, didn't that backfire on the Republicans? Would that not happen in the exactly same way for the Democrats now that they're impeaching Trump?

The tried and true 'last thing to happen is the thing that will always happen' analysis, a NSG favorite.

Plus, the economy is at an all-time high, unemployment is low,

Our labor participation rate is flattened at 63%...rich people are doing well, though. Good for them.

our international enemies are treating us with more respect...

Hahahahahahahaha...

it seems that the common populace would most likely re-elect Trump,

By what metric? His approval rating has been underwater almost his entire presidency and even the candidates wring their hands about electibility beat Trump in national polls.

and trying to remove him from office for "crimes" not substantiated by evidence beyond reasonable doubt isn't going to sit well with them. I doubt the Democrats are ignorant to this fact, so some of them will likely vote with the Republicans to not convict him.

You seem to be confused about how impeachment works or current polling on the subject.

Now, on a more moral level, what did Trump do wrong? From what I have learned, he offered compromises on many issues, including prison reform,

Kanye got one through. Good for him.

campaigning for LGBT tolerance in authoritarian nations,

While making it worse for LGBTi folks in his own nation.

and even giving humanitarian aid and/or amnesty for some illegal immigrants (which Democrats opposed, because there was probably some funding for the wall attached to the deal). In my opinion, Trump is a great moderate and a pragmatic, not a "fascist" who should be convicted.

He's neither pragmatic or moderate by any stretch of the definition of those words.

In short, Trump is a good president, there's not enough evidence to convict him,

Well, yeah if you block evidence and witnesses then there's not enough...

and impeaching him is therefore political suicide.

The last thing to happen is the thing that will always happen.

P.S. If you think what I'm saying is "offensive" or "ignorant", please consider what I have stated with an open mind and inwardly try to reason to yourself why you feel I'm being "offensive" or "ignorant". I doubt I will be able to change your mind (I learned that the hard way in other General forums), but I might as well sate my personal desire to express my thoughts and reasoning in a crowd of opposition.

Climb down off that cross, dude. We're building a half pipe.

(Also, I can't promise I'll respond to replies; I do have non-NS things I'm supposed to do.)

If I can accomplish anything, it will be weening people off the notion that anyone gives a shit when or if you respond to shit on a forum. No one is clocking your schedule. Those people that do requote something and go "Still waiting" or some shit? Clydes. You don't need to do this. If you never came back no one would notice or care. You have two weeks after the last person responded in the thread to respond to something, that's your only time limit, the gravedigging rule. Otherwise, don't worry about it.

[Chernoslavia]

Hmm, impeachment. Well, since I am incapable of staying away from expressing my thoughts, I guess I'll say what I think about Trump's impeachment here.

Not only is it morally wrong, it is also a terrible idea politically. The only two presidents to be impeached in the past (NOT Richard Nixon; he resigned first) were not convicted from office. Also, when Bill Clinton was impeached, didn't that backfire on the Republicans? Would that not happen in the exactly same way for the Democrats now that they're impeaching Trump?

The tried and true 'last thing to happen is the thing that will always happen' analysis, a NSG favorite.

Plus, the economy is at an all-time high, unemployment is low,

Our labor participation rate is flattened at 63%...rich people are doing well, though. Good for them.

our international enemies are treating us with more respect...

Hahahahahahahaha...

it seems that the common populace would most likely re-elect Trump,

By what metric? His approval rating has been underwater almost his entire presidency and even the candidates wring their hands about electibility beat Trump in national polls.

and trying to remove him from office for "crimes" not substantiated by evidence beyond reasonable doubt isn't going to sit well with them. I doubt the Democrats are ignorant to this fact, so some of them will likely vote with the Republicans to not convict him.

You seem to be confused about how impeachment works or current polling on the subject.

Now, on a more moral level, what did Trump do wrong? From what I have learned, he offered compromises on many issues, including prison reform,

Kanye got one through. Good for him.

campaigning for LGBT tolerance in authoritarian nations,

While making it worse for LGBTi folks in his own nation.

and even giving humanitarian aid and/or amnesty for some illegal immigrants (which Democrats opposed, because there was probably some funding for the wall attached to the deal). In my opinion, Trump is a great moderate and a pragmatic, not a "fascist" who should be convicted.

He's neither pragmatic or moderate by any stretch of the definition of those words.

In short, Trump is a good president, there's not enough evidence to convict him,

Well, yeah if you block evidence and witnesses then there's not enough...

and impeaching him is therefore political suicide.

The last thing to happen is the thing that will always happen.

P.S. If you think what I'm saying is "offensive" or "ignorant", please consider what I have stated with an open mind and inwardly try to reason to yourself why you feel I'm being "offensive" or "ignorant". I doubt I will be able to change your mind (I learned that the hard way in other General forums), but I might as well sate my personal desire to express my thoughts and reasoning in a crowd of opposition.

Climb down off that cross, dude. We're building a half pipe.

(Also, I can't promise I'll respond to replies; I do have non-NS things I'm supposed to do.)

If I can accomplish anything, it will be weening people off the notion that anyone gives a shit when or if you respond to shit on a forum. No one is clocking your schedule. Those people that do requote something and go "Still waiting" or some shit? Clydes. You don't need to do this. If you never came back no one would notice or care. You have two weeks after the last person responded in the thread to respond to something, that's your only time limit, the gravedigging rule. Otherwise, don't worry about it.

The more you go out of your way to try and let other people know that you ''don't care'', the more it implies that you do. Just a tip.

[Cannot think of a name]

The tried and true 'last thing to happen is the thing that will always happen' analysis, a NSG favorite.

Our labor participation rate is flattened at 63%...rich people are doing well, though. Good for them.

Hahahahahahahaha...

By what metric? His approval rating has been underwater almost his entire presidency and even the candidates wring their hands about electibility beat Trump in national polls.

You seem to be confused about how impeachment works or current polling on the subject.

Kanye got one through. Good for him.

While making it worse for LGBTi folks in his own nation.

He's neither pragmatic or moderate by any stretch of the definition of those words.

Well, yeah if you block evidence and witnesses then there's not enough...

The last thing to happen is the thing that will always happen.

Climb down off that cross, dude. We're building a half pipe.

If I can accomplish anything, it will be weening people off the notion that anyone gives a shit when or if you respond to shit on a forum. No one is clocking your schedule. Those people that do requote something and go "Still waiting" or some shit? Clydes. You don't need to do this. If you never came back no one would notice or care. You have two weeks after the last person responded in the thread to respond to something, that's your only time limit, the gravedigging rule. Otherwise, don't worry about it.

The more you go out of your way to try and let other people know that you ''don't care'', the more it implies that you do. Just a tip.

This gonna be a thing with you or something?

[Gormwood]

The more you go out of your way to try and let other people know that you ''don't care'', the more it implies that you do. Just a tip.

This gonna be a thing with you or something?

At this point even the pissed off Japanese ghost woman is saying "Jesus, let it go!" to him.

[Chernoslavia]

The more you go out of your way to try and let other people know that you ''don't care'', the more it implies that you do. Just a tip.

This gonna be a thing with you or something?

Will that become a thing with you?

[Cannot think of a name]

This gonna be a thing with you or something?

Will that become a thing with you?

Telling people that they don't have to schedule their responses and we all understand that NSG is not life? Such villainy. Thank god you came along, batman.

[Hurtful Thoughts]

Like I said, only child molestation would actually turn his base against him.

See, I think you're wrong about that. They'd just sponsor a contest to send him the prettiest little girls on a regular basis, as a tribute to our Great Leader — and insist that he was bestowing a tremendous honor on these sweet young virgins.

Good thing he's probably too old and fat to get it up any more.

Considering the backlash from the pro-2A community against Taran Butler for sexually abusing a Gun/Booth-bunny from SHOT show... I'd say that assumption is more a reflection of the sort of people you hang out with than the sort of people Trump hangs out with.

Now, on a more moral level, what did Trump do wrong?

He illegally withheld military aid to an ally in the middle of a war, in order to force that ally to announce a criminal investigation of a domestic political rival. When caught President Trump then lied to Congress and the public, all while refusing to cooperate with the Congressional investigation and attempting to block witnesses and documents from being released.

Except, mind you, THAT NO INVESTIGATION HAS BEEN ANNOUNCED. Plus the aid has already been given (ahead of schedual, even).
-The only one launched was an investigation a year ago into possible Russian meddling in the 2016 election, NOT Hunter-Biden.
--In fact, WSJ has reported that Ukraine is actively avoiding such an investigation at this time
---There was owever, an investigation over whether Ukranians were stalking a US Ambasador and leaving sexually lewd text-messeges on her cell-phone

If either of these two facts were false, yeah, maybe there could've been a legit case.

[Chernoslavia]

Will that become a thing with you?

Telling people that they don't have to schedule their responses and we all understand that NSG is not life? Such villainy. Thank god you came along, batman.

You're telling people something they're already aware of but let you know simply out of courtesy. You continuing to be whiney about this inadvertently tells us you are somewhat insecure about it. But you do you.

[Cannot think of a name]

Telling people that they don't have to schedule their responses and we all understand that NSG is not life? Such villainy. Thank god you came along, batman.

You're telling people something they're already aware of but let you know simply out of courtesy. You continuing to pester them about this inadvertently tells us you are somewhat insecure about it. But you do you.

You're the hero NSG deserves...

[Myrensis]

He illegally withheld military aid to an ally in the middle of a war, in order to force that ally to announce a criminal investigation of a domestic political rival. When caught President Trump then lied to Congress and the public, all while refusing to cooperate with the Congressional investigation and attempting to block witnesses and documents from being released.

Except, mind you, THAT NO INVESTIGATION HAS BEEN ANNOUNCED. Plus the aid has already been given (ahead of schedual, even).
-The only one launched was an investigation a year ago into possible Russian meddling in the 2016 election, NOT Hunter-Biden.
--In fact, WSJ has reported that Ukraine is actively avoiding such an investigation at this time
---There was owever, an investigation over whether Ukranians were stalking a US Ambasador and leaving sexually lewd text-messeges on her cell-phone

If either of these two facts were false, yeah, maybe there could've been a legit case.

Uh, if you hire someone to kill your wife, and they don't go through with it...you're still in legal trouble. The fact that Ukraine opted not to do Trumps bidding, and that apparently what few remaining saner voices there are in the Administration got him to release the aid anyway doesn't change the fact that he tried to use aid as a lever to get a foreign government to investigate a political rival for him.

Nor is it a factor in Trumps favor that his decision to send a senile Giuliani and his bumbling friends to do the dirty work for him resulted in Ukraine investigating them instead.

And no, the aid was not released 'ahead of schedule'. The Administration initially told Congress it would be released in February of 2019...and then they said it would be in May...and then finally released it in September, under pressure from the Pentagon and threats by Democrats to withhold billions in funding, so late in fact that the Pentagon could not actually disburse it before the end of the fiscal year and had to get Congress to include it in the continuing resolution rescinding and then re-appropriating the funds for the following year.

[Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States]

Considering the backlash from the pro-2A community against Taran Butler for sexually abusing a Gun/Booth-bunny from SHOT show... I'd say that assumption is more a reflection of the sort of people you hang out with than the sort of people Trump hangs out with.

What kind of of argument is that? Some pro-2A people were against sexual abuse, so Trump does not hang around sexual predators? He is an admitted sexual predator himself, and he hung around with Jeffrey Epstein.

Except, mind you, THAT NO INVESTIGATION HAS BEEN ANNOUNCED. Plus the aid has already been given (ahead of schedual, even).
-The only one launched was an investigation a year ago into possible Russian meddling in the 2016 election, NOT Hunter-Biden.
--In fact, WSJ has reported that Ukraine is actively avoiding such an investigation at this time
---There was owever, an investigation over whether Ukranians were stalking a US Ambasador and leaving sexually lewd text-messeges on her cell-phone

If either of these two facts were false, yeah, maybe there could've been a legit case.

Bribery is still bribery if it fails. Imagine a system where trying to bribe is totally okay, and criminal guilt then entirely hinges on what your partner actually does. In fact, attempted bribery is a federal crime on its own accord. Even if you fail, you are liable. The question whether Ukraine actually pursued investigations is entirely immaterial to the question whether Donald Trump did anything illegal.

So, no investigation has been announced, true, but that is legally irrelevant. Also, it's morally irrelevant, because Trump still did a bad thing, regardless of whether it is criminal. Which it is, of course.

And the aid was released, indeed. Only after the story broke, of course. If you say that military aid was released, then you must also accept that it was halted in the first place, while the President does not have the authority to halt military aid. So, did Trump commit bribery, or did he usurp powers of Congress? Your pick. Well, I say pick, he actually did both.

You would be a very bad conspirator if you kept publicly participating in the conspiracy when people got suspicious.

[Gormwood]

Considering the backlash from the pro-2A community against Taran Butler for sexually abusing a Gun/Booth-bunny from SHOT show... I'd say that assumption is more a reflection of the sort of people you hang out with than the sort of people Trump hangs out with.

What kind of of argument is that? Some pro-2A people were against sexual abuse, so Trump does not hang around sexual predators? He is an admitted sexual predator himself, and he hung around with Jeffrey Epstein.

Except, mind you, THAT NO INVESTIGATION HAS BEEN ANNOUNCED. Plus the aid has already been given (ahead of schedual, even).
-The only one launched was an investigation a year ago into possible Russian meddling in the 2016 election, NOT Hunter-Biden.
--In fact, WSJ has reported that Ukraine is actively avoiding such an investigation at this time
---There was owever, an investigation over whether Ukranians were stalking a US Ambasador and leaving sexually lewd text-messeges on her cell-phone

If either of these two facts were false, yeah, maybe there could've been a legit case.

Bribery is still bribery if it fails. Imagine a system where trying to bribe is totally okay, and criminal guilt then entirely hinges on what your partner actually does. In fact, attempted bribery is a federal crime on its own accord. Even if you fail, you are liable. The question whether Ukraine actually pursued investigations is entirely immaterial to the question whether Donald Trump did anything illegal.

So, no investigation has been announced, true, but that is legally irrelevant. Also, it's morally irrelevant, because Trump still did a bad thing, regardless of whether it is criminal. Which it is, of course.

And the aid was released, indeed. Only after the story broke, of course. If you say that military aid was released, then you must also accept that it was halted in the first place, while the President does not have the authority to halt military aid. So, did Trump commit bribery, or did he usurp powers of Congress? Your pick. Well, I say pick, he actually did both.

You would be a very bad conspirator if you kept publicly participating in the conspiracy when people got suspicious.

The "We Were Too Incompetent" excuse worked with the Mueller Probe so they're trying it again for the impeachment. But let's face it, when the jury is just waiting for the bell to yell "ACQUIT!" then you can have the most incompetent collection of slimy hypocritical dipshits on a defense team and still succeed.

[Gravlen]

He illegally withheld military aid to an ally in the middle of a war, in order to force that ally to announce a criminal investigation of a domestic political rival. When caught President Trump then lied to Congress and the public, all while refusing to cooperate with the Congressional investigation and attempting to block witnesses and documents from being released.

Except, mind you, THAT NO INVESTIGATION HAS BEEN ANNOUNCED. Plus the aid has already been given (ahead of schedual, even).

The White House broke the law by withholding aid to Ukraine that had been approved by the US Congress, a government watchdog has said.

The Government Accountability Office (GAO) ruling comes as President Donald Trump faces an impeachment trial in the Senate related to the withheld aid.

"Faithful execution of the law does not permit the President to substitute his own policy priorities for those that Congress has enacted into law," the decision by the GAO said.

The White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) "withheld funds for a policy reason, which is not permitted under the Impoundment Control Act (ICA)", the ruling continued.

The 1974 Impoundment Control Act says it is illegal for the White House to withhold aid appropriated by Congress. It also says the White House must first alert Congress before it delays or blocked funds, which the Trump administration did not do.

The aid to Ukraine was released in September 2019, more than two months after it was first blocked.

White House 'broke law' by withholding Ukraine aid, says watchdog

You seem to be wrong.

[Spirit of Hope]

He illegally withheld military aid to an ally in the middle of a war, in order to force that ally to announce a criminal investigation of a domestic political rival. When caught President Trump then lied to Congress and the public, all while refusing to cooperate with the Congressional investigation and attempting to block witnesses and documents from being released.

Except, mind you, THAT NO INVESTIGATION HAS BEEN ANNOUNCED. Plus the aid has already been given (ahead of schedual, even).
-The only one launched was an investigation a year ago into possible Russian meddling in the 2016 election, NOT Hunter-Biden.
--In fact, WSJ has reported that Ukraine is actively avoiding such an investigation at this time
---There was owever, an investigation over whether Ukranians were stalking a US Ambasador and leaving sexually lewd text-messeges on her cell-phone

If either of these two facts were false, yeah, maybe there could've been a legit case.

Except the GAO has already released a report stating the Ukrainian aid was illegally held up without Congress being notified and the aid was only released when Congress and the public was made aware of the illegal hold on aid. Just because the aid was eventually released doesn't mean it wasn't at one point held up.

The NSA, Ambassador to the EU, and a number of other professional diplomats have all said that their was a pressure campaign against the Ukraine. Again, that the pressure campaign failed does not mean it wasn't there.

[The Emerald Legion]

Except, mind you, THAT NO INVESTIGATION HAS BEEN ANNOUNCED. Plus the aid has already been given (ahead of schedual, even).

The White House broke the law by withholding aid to Ukraine that had been approved by the US Congress, a government watchdog has said.

The Government Accountability Office (GAO) ruling comes as President Donald Trump faces an impeachment trial in the Senate related to the withheld aid.

"Faithful execution of the law does not permit the President to substitute his own policy priorities for those that Congress has enacted into law," the decision by the GAO said.

The White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) "withheld funds for a policy reason, which is not permitted under the Impoundment Control Act (ICA)", the ruling continued.

The 1974 Impoundment Control Act says it is illegal for the White House to withhold aid appropriated by Congress. It also says the White House must first alert Congress before it delays or blocked funds, which the Trump administration did not do.

The aid to Ukraine was released in September 2019, more than two months after it was first blocked.

White House 'broke law' by withholding Ukraine aid, says watchdog

You seem to be wrong.

You seem to be of the opinion that the law isn't flexible where government is concerned. It clearly is as demonstrated by literally every politician in this country.

[Impaled Nazarene]

What a sham of a trial. I have no illusions of him being removed but wow. Too bad the Federal Courts are husks of themselves because all this nonsense deserves a good smacking.

[Zurkerx]

DOJ reveals 24 redacted emails related to Trump's involvement in Ukraine aid freeze.

OMB Lawyer said these emails are protected by “presidential privilege,” or as the lawyer says:

“Specifically, the documents in this category are emails that reflect communications by either the President, the Vice President, or the President’s immediate advisors regarding Presidential decision-making about the scope, duration, and purpose of the hold on military assistance to Ukraine.”

Essentially, we're hiding something. The only way I think we'll ever learn the truth is either Trump loses in 2020 or the Democrats win in 2024. Or, the courts demand the full, unredacted versions of the emails. After all, innocent people don't hide the evidence of their innocence.

[Page]

Is anyone still clinging to false hope or have we all come to terms with the fact that Trump is 100% guaranteed a rubber stamp acquittal by Congressional Republicans?

[Zurkerx]

Is anyone still clinging to false hope or have we all come to terms with the fact that Trump is 100% guaranteed a rubber stamp acquittal by Congressional Republicans?

Oh, he's going to be acquitted, I believed that for months now. The only hope he faces justice is if he's voted out in 2020.

[Gormwood]

Is anyone still clinging to false hope or have we all come to terms with the fact that Trump is 100% guaranteed a rubber stamp acquittal by Congressional Republicans?

Oh, he's going to be acquitted, I believed that for months now. The only hope he faces justice is if he's voted out in 2020.

And that enough people actually give a damn and don't have their votes suppressed or engineered.