Impeachment #2 has started - who wins in the court of public opinion? (1 Viewer)

Pat Hartman

Super Moderator
Staff member
Local time
Yesterday, 23:21
Joined
Feb 19, 2002
Messages
42,872
I don't know what happened. I'm playing bridge so I wasn't paying close attention. Seems like the Dems are presenting their "evidence" again with passion because "feelings" are everything to them. Logic is irrelevant. It is all about how you feel that makes you a good person. They keep talking about armed insurrectionists. Not sure who they're talking about. Only a couple of the hundreds that have been charged so far were charged with gun crimes.
 

Jon

Access World Site Owner
Staff member
Local time
Today, 03:21
Joined
Sep 28, 1999
Messages
7,284
Trump has been acquitted 57 - 43. Its over. Trump wins again. Democrats lose again.
 

Pat Hartman

Super Moderator
Staff member
Local time
Yesterday, 23:21
Joined
Feb 19, 2002
Messages
42,872
And the purple words and inflammatory hyperbole continue. How do reporters justify this drivel? Why do I want to know this "reporter's" opinion of the verdict?

as his fellow Republicans shielded him from accountability for the deadly assault by his supporters on the U.S. Capitol, a shrine of American democracy.


Conservatives have their work cut out for them. Somehow we have to figure out how to:
1. Get our educational system back and stop it from indoctrinating's our children to make them hate America.
2. Stop the Cancel Culture
3. Regain the First Amendment
4. Reign in big tech

And we have do do all this with no control over counting the votes. As we learned last year, if you count the votes in certain key locations, you can swing any election you choose to. The rest of the world might want to take note of this also.
 

AccessBlaster

Registered User.
Local time
Yesterday, 20:21
Joined
May 22, 2010
Messages
5,793
Still winning!

Trump acquitted​


1613252575935.png
 

Steve R.

Retired
Local time
Yesterday, 23:21
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
4,608
Trump Derangement Syndrome (TDS) still in full bloom. The Democrats have created an ersatz fanatical theocracy.
First, the Democrats march in lockstep, like the Borg. You would think that at least a few Democrats, given the Kangaroo Court style impeachments would have broken ranks and called out this witch-hunt for what it is. Vindictive hatred that violates the rule of law.

Second, unlike the hypnotized Democrats incapable of independent thought, some Republicans did break ranks with the Republican party. I have not heard the rationale by these Republicans identified below for why the joined the Democrats. Very unfortunate. Again, they seem to have caught TDS and have lost any semblance of rationality.
----------------------------------------------------------
The seven GOP senators who joined with all Democrats in finding Trump guilty were: Sens. Richard Burr of North Carolina, Bill Cassidy of Louisiana, Susan Collins of Maine, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, Mitt Romney of Utah, Ben Sasse of Nebraska and Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania.
 
Last edited:

AccessBlaster

Registered User.
Local time
Yesterday, 20:21
Joined
May 22, 2010
Messages
5,793
1. Get our educational system back and stop it from indoctrinating's our children to make them hate America.
2. Stop the Cancel Culture
3. Regain the First Amendment
4. Reign in big tech
I like Pat's suggestions, but first and foremost PRIMARY the (7) that voted the other way, starting with Mitt Romney. :p
 

Isaac

Lifelong Learner
Local time
Yesterday, 20:21
Joined
Mar 14, 2017
Messages
8,711
if we have to triage, i say:
#2 is a natural product of too many people with liberal minds
#3 will probably be OK once the various crap they keep trying to pass gets to the supreme court

Put all our effort in #1 and #4. Destroy big tech and make it little tech. I'll be OK if google goes away and Twitter becomes 20 other optional apps you can use. Destroy Amazon completely. Walmart is good enough to serve our needs and is (comparatively) apolitical.

I only gave this post 30 seconds of thought so it's not very profound!

I almost want Trump, despite all of his flaws, to run again IF he could win again in 2024, just out of spite to those who have tried to destroy him, and also partly (of course) because of his good policies and world mindset.

Anyway, by 4 years from now we are going to need to Make America Great Again.
 

AccessBlaster

Registered User.
Local time
Yesterday, 20:21
Joined
May 22, 2010
Messages
5,793
The problem is no democrats will go along and 7-8 Republicans will work against it.
 

Jon

Access World Site Owner
Staff member
Local time
Today, 03:21
Joined
Sep 28, 1999
Messages
7,284
Trumps lawyer completely obliterates the CBSN news anchor, exposing the bias and complicity of the media. It is a great demolition of snake oil presenters trying to distort the truth.

 

NauticalGent

Ignore List Poster Boy
Local time
Yesterday, 23:21
Joined
Apr 27, 2015
Messages
6,268
Trumps lawyer completely obliterates the CBSN news anchor, exposing the bias and complicity of the media. It is a great demolition of snake oil presenters trying to distort the truth.

This guy NAILS it! That is what we call a "Bitch Slap"
 

Pat Hartman

Super Moderator
Staff member
Local time
Yesterday, 23:21
Joined
Feb 19, 2002
Messages
42,872
If only more interviewees would respond like Van der Veer did, maybe, just maybe, the press would stop trying to tell viewers that is is OK to cheat. It was just a "little" check mark and just a "date". Go Michael!!!! People who are being interviewed need to start rejecting the premise of a loaded question. So Mrs. Hartman, when did you stop beating the cat? Practically every question of any House or Senate hearing starts with the Democrat giving a speech on why Trump is evil or why the person being interviewed is evil and then segues into a question that has no yes/no answer and which includes an ad hominin attack to boot.
 

Steve R.

Retired
Local time
Yesterday, 23:21
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
4,608
Since I included Trump's response to the Kangaroo Court style impeachment, I'll include Biden's as well. Biden issues statement on Trump impeachment acquittal: Substance of charge 'not in dispute'

Like Biden's inaugural address, this post impeachment statement is nothing but well written meaningless hot air for the benefit of the clueless gullible public.
  • An unfortunate fact, seven Republicans broke party ranks and sided with the Democrats. That unfortunately, is being used by the Democrats to claim "bi-partisanship". Just based on that one piece of bad "optics" the Republicans should never have voted with the Democrats. Democrats would never have broken ranks with their party. Proof of that, Democrats like mindless automatons simply went with the Party dictates. Politics is sometimes a "dirty" business. From the realpolitik viewpoint, the Republicans occasionally must get off their nice-guy image and play dirty politics too.
  • Biden expressed empathy for the police protecting the Capital. Where was his condemnation of the violence against police for the past year? Not to mention the looting and property destruction cause by BLM and Antifa.
  • Of course, the most nauseating part of Biden's statement concerned how democracy must be protected, when it is the Democrats who are undermining democracy. For five years the Democrats refused to accept the election of Trump and tried various unethical actions to create a "coup" to overthrow Trump. The impeachment actions were political hit jobs, not in line with democratic principles.
  • Biden speaks of "That is how we end this uncivil war and heal the very soul of our nation.". Yet Biden has not reached out to Republicans to offer compromise. As the supposed "winner" it is up to Biden to do the outreach. Instead of reaching out, Biden has taken the position that Republicans have not accepted his proposals, so he (Biden) will just go ahead to move forward with his legislative agenda (Tyranny of the Majority) as the Republicans would just slow him down in serving the people (sarcasm).
 

Pat Hartman

Super Moderator
Staff member
Local time
Yesterday, 23:21
Joined
Feb 19, 2002
Messages
42,872
I can't read the links you posted. They are behind a pay wall and I'm not paying.
#3 will probably be OK once the various crap they keep trying to pass gets to the supreme court
The Supremes are feckless empty robes. They have already shown that they have no intention of standing up for the Constitution. Last year, they could have impeded the steal by simply saying publicly that the Constitution specifies that ONLY State legislatures can make laws regarding voting and unconstitutional laws would not be upheld should anyone sue. PERIOD! Then when Roberts decided not to preside , he could have publicly made a statement that the Constitution does not support impeaching people who are not current office holders and doing so equates to a bill of attainder which is specifically FORBIDDEN by the constitution. But NO, the wuss did neither and that lead to a complete cluster-****.

I think they were trying to convince Biden that they could be trusted and so he didn't need to pack the court.
 

Steve R.

Retired
Local time
Yesterday, 23:21
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
4,608
This morning on was catching-up on Sunday shows that I missed. One show, "Media Buzz".
But who do you think will come out on top after all the arguments are heard? Will Democrat voters actually get to see the defences strongest points?
Two themes have emerged have emerged.
  • Alan Dershowitz and Johnathan Turley, on an academic abstract level have been correct and quite vocal that the impeachment of Trump was unconstitutional. But, at subtle more concrete level both Ari Fleischer and Fran Luntz noted that much of the media, when reporting on the impeachment results, proclaimed that Trump got-off on an obscure legal technically. The public is consequently left with the impression that Trump's lawyers were able to squirm out of a supposedly justifiable conviction through legal manipulation rather than the Democrats bringing an unconstitutional action against Trump.
  • Frank Luntz (a pollster) noted that the Democrats, through their use of the videos, "won" the propaganda war. So it would appear that Democratic manipulation of the video, worked to the benefit of the Democrats even it the videos presented a misleading narrative. Luntz also noted that the reporters in doing their "post game" analysis were not concerned with the Constitutional issues, but in continuing to advocate that Trump was still "guilty" and asserting that those who did not vote to support the impeachment effort were somehow wrong. See, as one example, @Jon post #31 were a reporter is using manipulative language to assail Trump's lawyer Michael van der Veen. In Summary, Howard Kurtz and Luntz noted that the media was making an emotional argument and was furious that Trump was not convicted. The Constitutionality (the legal justification) of the Democrats case was irrelevant to the media. The public is consequently left with a misktaken view as to what happened.
For the Democrats, "justice" is dispensed by the rabid lynch mob, the rule-of-law and the Constitution are irrelevant.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Update (2/16/2021): The New York Times Retracts the Sicknick Story. I was unable to locate the actual New York Times article. Nevertheless this was another example of "fake" news being manufactured to inflame an anti-Trump narrative. The death of Sicknick is highly unfortunate, but the Democrats disgracefully magnified it for their political gain. The Democrats should be condemned for that.
Medical experts have said he did not die of blunt force trauma, according to one law enforcement official.
The account of Sicknick’s death was reported as fact, not speculation or rumor.
In an outrageous effort to create more favorable optics before the impeachment trial, ...
 
Last edited:

Jon

Access World Site Owner
Staff member
Local time
Today, 03:21
Joined
Sep 28, 1999
Messages
7,284
Parler is back up and running, so at least Trump might have some outlet.
 

Pat Hartman

Super Moderator
Staff member
Local time
Yesterday, 23:21
Joined
Feb 19, 2002
Messages
42,872
I know that liberals are not rational but whenever I engage one, I try to discuss law and order. They don't seem to understand that Congress writes the laws and the Executive Branch (the President) is there to enforce them and the Supreme Court is there to make sure that neither oversteps their bounds. It is really scary how little the general public knows about how our system of government works. They hate Trump because he enforced our laws and simply cannot understand that that is actually his job. He would be derelict if he didn't enforce them. I try to guide the discussion to exactly what laws it's OK to break and which we need to enforce. They're OK with burning and looting "downtown" but when it comes to a crowd invading their space, they now want the police to enforce the law.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top Bottom