Jump to content

spankis

Members
  • Posts

    1,691
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Posts posted by spankis

  1. Can I get the kickass insight into how this latest impeachment process compares to the first? I'm thinking in terms of:

     

    - potential seriousness of the allegation(s)

    - investigative process involved (and why?)

    - witnesses involved (and why?)

     

    Can you weigh in on how Marjorie's basis for impeachment you linked above compares?

  2. Impeaching the President merely for being on the other team or disagreeing politically? I stand corrected, no issues there.

     

    I was fully aware of Trump saying he wanted people to come protest on Jan 6th. We have the right to protest, we do not however have the right to breach security and destroy/steal property. In his speech that day he specifically said "peacefully" march to the Capitol. When people started storming the capital (a small group - "mostly peaceful" as the left would say) people across parties condemned it, including Trump. He told people to go home.

     

    You have all these articles talking about how people are planning to protest on Jan 6th, not a single one says that Trump is inciting violence before it happened. No, just like those who think Nostradamus predicted 9/11, where were you on 9/10, where were you on Jan 5th?

     

    This is just like, my opinion, man, but I think you just might be choosing to selectively ignore some big chunks of reality here bud. I think you're also stretching the realities of what did happen to include some things that really just didn't.

  3. The precedent has been set.

     

    Can you offer an example of the potential "misuse" of this precedent moving forward? I'm afraid it's lost on me. Am I a big 'ol dummy?

     

    You are, or at least coming off as, a hypocritical, authoritarian asshole.

     

    "Trump incited the violence" but also "the attack on the capitol was planned weeks in advanced". Well which one is it? Doesn't matter, impeached within hours without any hearings.

     

    I thought it was pretty well documented fact that it was planned well in advance. Seems pretty foolish to suggest that all the people gathered at the capitol in the short time between when Trump spoke and when the capital was "stormed". Is this new information for you or what? I don't understand the "which one is it" commentary. Just looking to poke holes in the credibility of the allegations I guess?

     

    Literally the first result that comes up, noting the December 28th tweets:

     

    https://www.wusa9.com/article/news/local/protests/trump-supporters-rally-protest-january-6-maga-protest/65-2639563a-b04e-4a40-a028-23083673d46b

     

    Further reading:

     

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/jemimamcevoy/2020/12/23/president-trump-has-called-supporters-plan-dc-rally-to-overturn-his-loss-on-day-congress-certifies-election/?sh=6b559bab4c9b

     

    https://www.politico.com/news/2021/01/04/maga-marchers-trump-last-stand-454382

  4. I don't agree in any way with what was done on Jan 6, but I just don't understand how Libs can absolutely overlook the destruction that took place in 2020???

    I'm glad these people are being prosecuted, and I think more people should have been this past summer. You're telling me that illegal actions are justified by the cause? These days the "cause" is usually based on immediate social media rhetoric, as opposed to proven fact.

    I'd rather see the capital building stormed any day, rather than see hard working citizens loose there businesses to looting, destruction and fire. There were "occupations" of city sectors, local and federal buildings destroyed, city monuments and statues destroyed, and many people killed on each side.

    I've yet to see a democrat speak about these issues aside from claiming that racism etc.. can't be compared to whatever the Trumpers feel they've been wronged about.

     

    So, your beliefs justify this destruction, but the beliefs of others do not?

     

    Again, to qualify this, I do not agree with what was done, and I don't believe they represent the majority of the conservative party, but the hypocrisy of the party taking power is just as frightening as the one exiting.

     

    You're missing the point. Each side has "bad actors", and sane "protesters" following the law. No need to get into proportions of sanity within each group here I don't suppose, but maybe worth considering.

     

    Bottom line is that the president directly requested/directed/instigated what occured at the capitol, called them special people, and then told them that he loved them and that they should go home having mostly concluded the "fight" he requested.

     

    The attempts at "but dah BLM protests" comparisons should be viewed as the distraction attempt they are.

     

    Separate note, but I can't help but ask myself if so many middle-aged men of a certain age would view Nancy Pelosi with near as much hatred and disgust if she were male. Imagine for moment, a Nathan Pelosi if you will, with all the same views/quotes/positions.

  5. I'm going to say it's because he can't presently be trusted to function in public. The same reason Sleepy 'Ol Joe has managed to put out 2 very coherent live statements compared to Donnie's pre-recorded teleprompter read with half a dozen visible editing cuts.
  6. Completely insane that he was denied approval, and an hour and a half was lost trying to get approval.

     

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/andrewsolender/2021/01/07/maryland-governor-says-pentagon-repeatedly-denied-approval-to-send-national-guard-to-capitol/

     

     

     

    Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

     

    Strange, this flies directly in the face of recorded statements from the president claiming he "immediately" called in the national guard himself. I'm torn with who to believe here... a quandary indeed.

  7. I don't know how this devolved into "everybody lies" like it has, but here we are. It's not about the lies per se, or the fabricated data and testimony, it's about the president and his lawyers directly pressuring an elected official to bend the rules/results/reality to suit their preferred outcome. It's also about thinly veiled (if veiled at all) threats being made if the person being pressured doesn't comply.

     

    Greg has said all of this already, but it's not hearsay, or media perspective, or taken out of context. It didn't occur the day after the election, or the week after. It occurred this past weekend, after all the court rulings had been made, ballot counts certified, etc. etc. It's exactly what was said, and was recorded for anyone to hear.

     

    Cue the continual stream of:

     

    - Trump is stupid, he says dumb things

    - Trump didn't really mean that, he meant this other thing he didn't say instead (obviously)

    - Trump may have done this thing, but non-republicans have done the same/worse/pick your adjective

    - It's what politicians do, duh

     

    Anyone who can dismiss this behavior is ignorant, a fool, or thinks everyone other than them must be.

  8. My parents had an ice covered tree limb go through the membrane layer of their 32' travel trailer a few years back. From what I remember it was like a 4" hole.

     

    Insurance covered the repair, and replacing the full membrane was the solution, so all of the roof-mounted stuff like A/C, vents, antenna, etc. all had to come off, new membrane front to rear glued down, caulked, etc., then all that shat was re-installed and caulked around. I don't know what the bill to insurance was, but from memory I think that's what a "fix it right" roof repair effort entails.

     

    I will say that I spend a lot of time on membrane roofs of buildings for work, and those are patched/re-sealed pretty frequently and typically only fail when somebody tears a whole on them via foot traffic, dropping tools or equipment, etc. Now buildings aren't going 70mph down the freeway, but food for thought.

  9. Mace, are you interested in learning why you might be misinformed about this topic?

     

    I'm interested in learning why Mace might be misinformed. I continue to encounter other Maces at work who repeat the same lines but can't provide sources much beyond hearsay.

×
×
  • Create New...