-=OUR HOUSE=- A Forum for Fans of Duke Sports
https://crazietalk.net/ourhouse/
Ugh. I hadn't thought of it quite that way, but you might just be right. The problem all along has not been Trump. It's been his host of enablers, many of whom are still very much in the enabling business.
I've figured that has been apparent for a couple years, now she's simply stepping her game. (As was noted above, she will be in the opposite court from Cruz and Hawley.)
Read the article gumbomoop linked. It is really long so I was reading it on and off all day, but it is really well done - thanks to gumbomoop for providing it. She is incredibly slimy. Says what people want to hear and doesn't hesitate to throw anyone under the bus. Her waffling on Trump is unbelievable, especially her rationalizing him early in the article by saying "well, he really thought he had been cheated, so it is ok." So she seems to be saying "well, if America is OK with a narcissist who believes his own set of facts because they support the narrative that works well for him, then it is OK by me - if he says he truly believes that it is OK to gun down everyone who doesn't wear a red hat and enough people support it, I'm OK with that too!"CameronBornAndBred wrote: ↑February 12th, 2021, 3:41 pmI've figured that has been apparent for a couple years, now she's simply stepping her game. (As was noted above, she will be in the opposite court from Cruz and Hawley.)
I don't know enough about her to judge other than like just about every other GOP member, she was firmly in Trump's pocket. At least until it got too crowded and uncomfortable.
Oh wait...then I totally know enough about her to judge.
Why is this just coming out now?Furniture wrote: ↑February 12th, 2021, 11:08 pmA couple of things are getting a few GQP members upset today...
https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/12/politics ... index.html
“In an expletive-laced phone call with House Republican leader Kevin McCarthy while the Capitol was under attack, then-President Donald Trump said the rioters cared more about the election results than McCarthy did.
"Well, Kevin, I guess these people are more upset about the election than you are," Trump said, according to lawmakers who were briefed on the call afterward by McCarthy”.
I've seen more than a few stories in the last couple days that will never see light in the impeachment proceedings. And even if they did, I doubt they would have made a difference.dudog wrote: ↑February 13th, 2021, 12:05 amWhy is this just coming out now?Furniture wrote: ↑February 12th, 2021, 11:08 pmA couple of things are getting a few GQP members upset today...
https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/12/politics ... index.html
“In an expletive-laced phone call with House Republican leader Kevin McCarthy while the Capitol was under attack, then-President Donald Trump said the rioters cared more about the election results than McCarthy did.
"Well, Kevin, I guess these people are more upset about the election than you are," Trump said, according to lawmakers who were briefed on the call afterward by McCarthy”.
I thought the same thing. Are there some tactics going on?dudog wrote: ↑February 13th, 2021, 12:05 amWhy is this just coming out now?Furniture wrote: ↑February 12th, 2021, 11:08 pmA couple of things are getting a few GQP members upset today...
https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/12/politics ... index.html
“In an expletive-laced phone call with House Republican leader Kevin McCarthy while the Capitol was under attack, then-President Donald Trump said the rioters cared more about the election results than McCarthy did.
"Well, Kevin, I guess these people are more upset about the election than you are," Trump said, according to lawmakers who were briefed on the call afterward by McCarthy”.
This.CameronBornAndBred wrote: ↑February 13th, 2021, 12:16 am
I've seen more than a few stories in the last couple days that will never see light in the impeachment proceedings. And even if they did, I doubt they would have made a difference.
Still, it's a court of public opinion, one that never goes into recess. If I am running against anyone that votes to acquit, 75% of my ads would be hammering January 6th home.
I believe it will. 1/6 is the 9/11 of this generation.OPK wrote: ↑February 13th, 2021, 8:34 amThis.CameronBornAndBred wrote: ↑February 13th, 2021, 12:16 am
I've seen more than a few stories in the last couple days that will never see light in the impeachment proceedings. And even if they did, I doubt they would have made a difference.
Still, it's a court of public opinion, one that never goes into recess. If I am running against anyone that votes to acquit, 75% of my ads would be hammering January 6th home.
Trump could admit he did it, and he would still be acquitted by the Senate Republicans.
And it is a gift to the Dems in the short term. Whether it will be remembered or resonate in 2022 remains to be seen.
I think the impeachment managers worked 24/7 to put this thing together, but they were bound to miss something. They were in a no-win situation. They wanted to get this done asap while it was fresh in people's minds. But by doing it quickly, they did not have as much time as they would have liked to get all of the facts. Given the circumstances, they have done really well.dudog wrote: ↑February 13th, 2021, 12:05 amWhy is this just coming out now?Furniture wrote: ↑February 12th, 2021, 11:08 pmA couple of things are getting a few GQP members upset today...
https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/12/politics ... index.html
“In an expletive-laced phone call with House Republican leader Kevin McCarthy while the Capitol was under attack, then-President Donald Trump said the rioters cared more about the election results than McCarthy did.
"Well, Kevin, I guess these people are more upset about the election than you are," Trump said, according to lawmakers who were briefed on the call afterward by McCarthy”.
As I stated a few hours ago to OPK, I disagree. I sincerely hope I am right and you are wrong. The hell with unity (I know that's not what you are saying).CrazyNotCrazie wrote: ↑February 13th, 2021, 11:09 amI think the impeachment managers worked 24/7 to put this thing together, but they were bound to miss something. They were in a no-win situation. They wanted to get this done asap while it was fresh in people's minds. But by doing it quickly, they did not have as much time as they would have liked to get all of the facts. Given the circumstances, they have done really well.dudog wrote: ↑February 13th, 2021, 12:05 amWhy is this just coming out now?Furniture wrote: ↑February 12th, 2021, 11:08 pmA couple of things are getting a few GQP members upset today...
https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/12/politics ... index.html
“In an expletive-laced phone call with House Republican leader Kevin McCarthy while the Capitol was under attack, then-President Donald Trump said the rioters cared more about the election results than McCarthy did.
"Well, Kevin, I guess these people are more upset about the election than you are," Trump said, according to lawmakers who were briefed on the call afterward by McCarthy”.
As we all know, he is going to get off. Which is ridiculous. And as we all also agree, those who vote against impeachment need to have their feet held to the fire. The question is, for how many is that actually an issue? How many of the 40+ Senators who will vote against impeachment live in states where the voters are remotely troubled by this? And of those, how many are up for re-election in 2022? As much as this was a huge event in American history, by 2024 and more so by 2026, this is old news.
Largely agree with your list. And it looks like of your probables, 4 of 5 voted to call witnesses. Toomey did not. Interesting that Graham did also. His intentions are obviously not pure - he is likely going to drag this out and try to make Democrats look bad. But interesting that he was alone in trying to do so. He just got re-elected so he is a total loose cannon.gumbomoop wrote: ↑February 13th, 2021, 10:00 amI began composing this post before the news broke [Breaking News!! Breaking News!!] that McConnell had informed his Republican conference that he’d vote to acquit. Had he announced he’d vote to convict, I’d guess there would be 10-11 votes to convict. Had he stayed silent, I’d guess 7-8. But now, looks like 5-6. Fewer?
Hoping for a solemn summation today from Raskin, with attention to “judgment of history” and the “judgment of generations of students to come.”
I assume there’s no chance of conviction, but the higher the number of votes to convict, the better for the country, the better for the intermediate-range chances of a revived, principled conservatism, the better for our reputation around the world, the better for the stability and even survival of our constitutional democratic republic in the face of a real fascist threat.
So I consider the rather few Republicans who might vote to convict. Here are some categories, and guesses varying from sort-of-confident to wild. I’d be interested in corrections from any of you who are more informed (or even opinionated) about any of these folks.
1. Probables — Romney, Murkowski, Collins, Sasse, Toomey. All of these strike me as actual conservatives who have made public statements critical of Trump. I will be a little surprised and a lot dismayed if any of these vote No.
2. Possibles
a. Cassidy — In for a penny, in for a pound: given his public decision to consider the evidence, he’s drawn fierce criticism back home. But he was just reëlected, so might be betting that his party will soon tire of Trumpism.
b. Capito — She’s what passes for a “moderate conservative.” Works across the aisle occasionally.
3. Barely possibles, but now highly unlikely given McConnell’s announcement this morning that he’s a No.
a. Portman — Disappointing that he isn’t a probable, as he’s retiring, fed up with the madness. But he’s only 65, and maybe thinks the era of Trump will continue for awhile in Ohio.
b. Burr — An actual conservative, retiring, dislikes Trump. Only 65. Unclear whether he thinks conservatism can trump Trumpism going forward in NC.
c. Tillis — An actual conservative, just reëlected. Ditto above comment re Burr on Trumpism in NC.
d. Shelby — He’s 86, retiring.
e. Grassley — Hasn’t announced his plans for 2022. He’d be 89 if he runs for reëlection then.
I've been thinking about this, and have no idea. However, I don't know if any of you (other than OPK) have ever been involved in a trial, but it hard to overstate the impact of witnesses. The lawyers on each side have their necessary agenda, and witnesses under oath make the difference.
That truly surprises me. I'm glad they are doing it, but I did not expect it at all.
Well so much for that.CameronBornAndBred wrote: ↑February 13th, 2021, 12:36 pmThat truly surprises me. I'm glad they are doing it, but I did not expect it at all.
While it won't change the outcome, it does reinforce the narrative. Once again, court of public opinion, and the more that public sees is more that the public remembers.
