Extra Extra Read All About It - It's Official: Trump has been IMPEACHED II

[IndyBeerman]

False. I’m fairly convinced that if there were a secret ballot, the president would be removed. However, since Senators are beholden to their constituents, no matter how dumb they may be, they will vote in a way that best ensures they keep their seats.

It's a opinion.

My opinion is if there was a secret ballot that a LOT of democrats would be voting to acquit and end this show that is really nothing more than a carrot being dangled
in front of a select few of them because they seem to always have a need to be in front of a camera to justify their existence.

Who knows, maybe there has already been one, hence the secret, imagine if a secret vote got out that the majority of Democrats actually was against impeachment.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

I'm surprised that you're surprised about Kuts position.
You've been here long enough to know that he's just trolling, again...

BTW- Elected representatives should ALWAYS be beholden to their constituents.
When they cease to be, removal is in order.

Good point. I should've known better. I mean he's always hinted at it, but that was probably the clearest example of his true feelings that I've seen.

 

[Ingomike]

It's a opinion.

My opinion is if there was a secret ballot that a LOT of democrats would be voting to acquit and end this show that is really nothing more than a carrot being dangled in front of a select few of them
because they seem to always have a need to be in front of a camera to justify their existence.

Who knows, maybe there has already been one, hence the secret, imagine if a secret vote got out that the majority of Democrats actually was against impeachment.

Would you really bet a couple of paychecks on that? I sure wouldn't. I would bet a couple on the point in #580. Always follow the money...

 

[jamil]

A question does not answer a question. If you can’t, or won’t answer the question, just pretend you didn’t see it.

In wasn’t answering a question. I was asking one. It may happen to be that one answers the other, though. My question is as serious as yours.

 

[jamil]

False. I’m fairly convinced that if there were a secret ballot, the president would be removed. However, since Senators are beholden to their constituents, no matter how dumb they may be, they will vote in a way that best ensures they keep their seats.

Let me ask this: are you fairly convinced that the only reason people could be skeptical of the Democrats’ case is because they’re stupid?

 

[BugI02]

Why would someone seeking the truth not want witnesses to testify? The president said he did everything perfect. If you think the process is a sham, why not have the witnesses show up and prove it's a sham? Not allowing witnesses, even if you think its a sham, makes it seem like there's a cover-up, and that no one wants to hear things that would be problematic.

If we can find anyone seeking the truth, we'll ask them. I didn't see anyone holding up a lantern, though

 

[MCgrease08]

If we can find anyone seeking the truth, we'll ask them. I didn't see anyone holding up a lantern, though

 

[BugI02]

A question does not answer a question. If you can’t, or won’t answer the question, just pretend you didn’t see it.

Yesss. You are proving an excellent exemplar of this vis a vis jamil's reformulation of your 'complaint'

 

[BugI02]

False. I’m fairly convinced that if there were a secret ballot, the president would be removed. However, since Senators are beholden to their constituents, no matter how dumb they may be, they will vote in a way that best ensures they keep their seats.

You say that like it is a bad thing (and thus reveal much about your own dark desires). Are not our elected officials supposed to [STRIKE]be beholden to[/STRIKE] represent the desires of their constituents? I think that's a feature

Edit: One can only infer that you approved of the (former) MPs delay and obstruction of the British people's will, embodied in Brexit, all 'for the good' of the unwashed masses who made that choice in the first place because of course 'our betters' should always be heeded. There is likely a place for you in the back benches

 

[DoggyDaddy]

You say that like it is a bad thing (and thus reveal much about your own dark desires). Are not our elected officials supposed to [STRIKE]be beholden to[/STRIKE] represent the desires of their constituents? I think that's a feature

He probably believes his benevolent overlords will go easier on him in the re-education camps if he holds them up as our "betters".

 

[2A_Tom]

You say that like it is a bad thing (and thus reveal much about your own dark desires). Are not our elected officials supposed to [STRIKE]be beholden to[/STRIKE] represent the desires of their constituents? I think that's a feature

Actually, NO.

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.

 

[2A_Tom]

[video=youtube_share;0qg3ZMMLFYs]https://youtu.be/0qg3ZMMLFYs[/video]

 

[BugI02]

I disagree. They are called 'representatives' in the Constitution, any thoughts on why that is so? The oath defines their highest loyalty, but not their duty. So long as it doesn't conflict with that oath, their duty is to represent their constituents honestly and fairly. The oath sets boundaries on their duty, it doesn't form the sum total of that duty

 

[jamil]

I disagree. They are called 'representatives' in the Constitution, any thoughts on why that is so? The oath defines their highest loyalty, but not their duty. So long as it doesn't conflict with that oath, their duty is to represent their constituents honestly and fairly. The oath sets boundaries on their duty, it doesn't form the sum total of that duty

In terms of duty, it is up to the voters to determine if the duty was executed to their satisfaction.

 

[MCgrease08]

Let's please keep it to impeachment. Don't open this voter fraud can of worms again.

 

[Ingomike]

Let's please keep it to impeachment. Don't open this voter fraud can of worms again.

Put it in the generic political discussion...

 

[Kutnupe14]

In wasn’t answering a question. I was asking one. It may happen to be that one answers the other, though. My question is as serious as yours.

Exactly. If you respond to a question with a question. I'm not going to answer it, until my question has been answered first.

 

[2A_Tom]

I have only seen you answer one question in the years I have been here. I may have missed others. You routinely ignore other's questions.

It is absurd that you expect others to respect your questions.

 

[Route 45]

People still haven't learned not to feed the Kutnoop Klown.

 

[Kutnupe14]

I have only seen you answer one question in the years I have been here. I may have missed others. You routinely ignore other's questions.

It is absurd that you expect others to respect your questions.

I suggest you get your eyes checked out, or read more.