Doesn’t Matter Who Wins the K Race; We’re All the Same

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by Adder

Yes. I said that somewhere

Fair.

TM

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Oh, bullshit.

Prepositions. They'll sabotage your comeback every time.

There isn't any evidence of that, and you know it.

There's absolutely evidence adequate enough to assert there might have been coordination or orchestration. A similar thing happened with this Russiagate situation, which you might recall. There was all of this discussion about collusion and everyone looked for it, but in the end, there weren't facts sufficiently tying Trump to Russia. But guess what? A ton of people still believe it happened, or think it might have happened. Scant evidence - but just enough to justify a sincere investigation - coupled with a relentless media campaign (spearheaded by Schiff, who did endless TV appearances) has created a "question of fact" regarding whether Trump "colluded" with Russians.

The fact that Schiff said he didn't know about the complaint, then later changed his story, is more than enough for any decent lawyer to be able to argue the following to a judge:

"Your Honor, there's convenient timing, and a witness with motive to possibly hide facts telling two different stories. We need discovery on this."

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

ПРЕАМБУЛА: ОТВЕТСТВЕННОСТИЮРИСТА, [4]

Okay, you gotta give him this one?

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

The transcript and depositions, from what I've seen, are bad. And even with the odds in Trump's favor, one never knows for certain how public sentiment might change between now and November 2020. (Read: We have a recession.)

If I'm an R operative, I think like Remy deciding to shoot Andy Stern at the end of Casino: "Why take a chance?" Pile up as many pretexts as one can, because you might need them.

It is insane to go into any proceeding without as many Plan B or concurrent defenses as one can employ. Schiff is one of those pretexts.

Your argument is effectively, "The Rs needn't sweat this, as the Senate is certain to acquit." I tend to agree the deck is heavily in Trump's favor there, and conviction a very long shot. But still... why not stack it even further, as much as you can? It's a hell of a ballsy strategy to put all of your chips on jury nullification, and those depositions, and that transcript, are really fucking "bad facts."

The Democrats would be in a better posture if they didn't have a target like Schiff out there. I suspect Pelosi is staying away from this as much as possible, and directing others with high profiles to do so, because she saw the deflection defenses coming miles away.

Dude, there may actually be something seriously wrong with you--you really are susceptible to these ridiculous fucking arguments.

There is no there there with Schiff. The Republicans have absolutely nothing. This is the clearest case of abuse of office to extort a foreign power for personal political gain as can exist. If the whistle blower worked for an Administration that had any integrity at all, they would have brought the complaint through normal channels. Because they knew that this Administration is as corrupt as can be, they contacted a member of Congress to protect the integrity of the process. There is no evidence of any type of influence or coordination or nefarious anything. None. The fucking transcript confirms the whistle blowers take. Period. How the fuck could Schiff coordinate that? The pretext is stupid on its fucking face. There is only bullshit innuendo to be greedily eaten up by you and the Republican Party.

But this is what you need to focus on because it's been said to you like a dozen fucking times already. If it wasn't Schiff it would be someone else. If they couldn't get idiots like you to act like this is something, they'd pick something else. It. doesn't. fucking. matter what it is. Why do you think they want to out the whistle blower? So they can find a text he wrote 10 years ago supporting his local Democrat or so that they can say he was passed over for a promotion or whatever stupid shit they can find from absolutely anyone. They're just making it up. And here you are carrying their water like some version of Bobby Boucher come to life.

You're right that they want a pretext. The failure of your argument that you can't see is that you think whatever pretext they choose fucking matters to their cult members. I'm sure they'd love to have something better to point to. But they know it just doesn't fucking matter.

Gingrich: "What you are watching is a legislative coup d'état. They tried for two years to get rid of Donald Trump using the Russian deal, and when that collapsed on them, and they looked like they were stupid when Mueller reported, they had to find a new gimmick. This is the new gimmick."

Graham: "I've written the whole process off ... I think this is a bunch of B.S."

The Republican Party is a fucking cult. Nothing they say can be taken seriously at all. But here you are:



TM

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by Adder

It's not. Your version, in which he sought information, credits the nonsense claims that there was any information to find. It also lends at least casual credence to the "Trump wanted to fight corruption" story that will be central to the defense.

Bill Taylor, the top U.S. diplomat in Ukraine, told impeachment investigators that Trump made the quid pro quo demand on a Sept. 7 phone call with Gordon Sondland, the president’s handpicked ambassador to the European Union, according to a transcript of Taylor’s Oct. 22 deposition.

“President Trump did insist that President Zelensky go to a microphone and say he is opening investigations of Biden and 2016 election interference and that President Zelensky should to do this himself,” Taylor testified, according to the transcript, which was released by Democratic impeachment leaders Wednesday.

https://www.nydailynews.com/news/pol...qKRUlFHWrDea_Y

TM

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by Pretty Little Flower

Can you remind me which ethics rule requires this? Thanks!!!

TM

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

Dude, there may actually be something seriously wrong with you--you really are susceptible to these ridiculous fucking arguments.

There is no there there with Schiff. The Republicans have absolutely nothing. This is the clearest case of abuse of office to extort a foreign power for personal political gain as can exist. If the whistle blower worked for an Administration that had any integrity at all, they would have brought the complaint through normal channels. Because they knew that this Administration is as corrupt as can be, they contacted a member of Congress to protect the integrity of the process. There is no evidence of any type of influence or coordination or nefarious anything. None. The fucking transcript confirms the whistle blowers take. Period. How the fuck could Schiff coordinate that? The pretext is stupid on its fucking face. There is only bullshit innuendo to be greedily eaten up by you and the Republican Party.

But this is what you need to focus on because it's been said to you like a dozen fucking times already. If it wasn't Schiff it would be someone else. If they couldn't get idiots like you to act like this is something, they'd pick something else. It. doesn't. fucking. matter what it is. Why do you think they want to out the whistle blower? So they can find a text he wrote 10 years ago supporting his local Democrat or so that they can say he was passed over for a promotion or whatever stupid shit they can find from absolutely anyone. They're just making it up. And here you are carrying their water like some version of Bobby Boucher come to life.

You're right that they want a pretext. The failure of your argument that you can't see is that you think whatever pretext they choose fucking matters to their cult members. I'm sure they'd love to have something better to point to. But they know it just doesn't fucking matter.

Gingrich: "What you are watching is a legislative coup d'état. They tried for two years to get rid of Donald Trump using the Russian deal, and when that collapsed on them, and they looked like they were stupid when Mueller reported, they had to find a new gimmick. This is the new gimmick."

Graham: "I've written the whole process off ... I think this is a bunch of B.S."

The Republican Party is a fucking cult. Nothing they say can be taken seriously at all. But here you are:



TM

Are you and Ty impaired? I'm not carrying anyone's water. I'm telling you I think they:

1. Need a decent pretext (I think you're wrong that they can just "say anything");
2. Schiff is the best pretext they have.

Our disagreement comes down to you concluding that a pretext is not necessary. Or that any one will do. I'm not so sure. I'd want a few, and from what I see, Schiff is the best of those available. And while there may be no there there, there is enough of a hint of there there to say there's a there there, and that's all you need.

So drive this through the cement between your ears: I am not saying Schiff coordinated. I am saying I could make that argument effectively, regardless of its truth. I don't know how or why this escapes you. But I suspect it's because you want to be able to argue that I'm buying the GOP talking points on Schiff. I'm not. I'm telling you, however, that they are necessary because Trump needs a deflection, and they are effective. We agree on the latter, not on the former. Strangely, that means you think the "cult" of the GOP will acquit more easily than I do.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

Bill Taylor, the top U.S. diplomat in Ukraine, told impeachment investigators that Trump made the quid pro quo demand on a Sept. 7 phone call with Gordon Sondland, the president’s handpicked ambassador to the European Union, according to a transcript of Taylor’s Oct. 22 deposition.

“President Trump did insist that President Zelensky go to a microphone and say he is opening investigations of Biden and 2016 election interference and that President Zelensky should to do this himself,” Taylor testified, according to the transcript, which was released by Democratic impeachment leaders Wednesday.

https://www.nydailynews.com/news/pol...qKRUlFHWrDea_Y

TM

That's a really bad fact. How you can cite this and then out of the other side of your mouth say the GOP won't need a really solid pretext to acquit is beyond me. Those senators will need every excuse they can find.

[Icky Thump]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

Anyone remember when LTers was ABBA or GwNC telling fuck stories?

Yeah, why I post 3x a year now.

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Our disagreement comes down to you concluding that a pretext is not necessary. Or that any one will do. I'm not so sure. I'd want a few, and from what I see, Schiff is the best of those available. And while there may be no there there, there is enough of a hint of there there to say there's a there there, and that's all you need.

So drive this through the cement between your ears: I am not saying Schiff coordinated. I am saying I could make that argument effectively, regardless of its truth. I don't know how or why this escapes you. But I suspect it's because you want to be able to argue that I'm buying the GOP talking points on Schiff. I'm not. I'm telling you, however, that they are necessary because Trump needs a deflection, and they are effective. We agree on the latter, not on the former. Strangely, that means you think the "cult" of the GOP will acquit more easily than I do.

No, you fucking clown. You can't make the argument for the many reasons pointed out to you already. You can only make it to lunatics who are too stupid to understand that it is the flimsiest pretext in the world or too full on Kool-Aid to care. And the fact that you keep acting like you can make this argument to anyone other than the people who fall into those two categories means you are either in the midst of a fucking stroke or too deluded as to your own non-existent brilliance to get it.

And the fact that you keep trying is the exact same thing as carrying their water.

TM

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

That's a really bad fact. How you can cite this and then out of the other side of your mouth say the GOP won't need a really solid pretext to acquit is beyond me. Those senators will need every excuse they can find.

Why do you keep saying this? Why will they need a solid pretext? Why will they need every excuse? Explain that. They can point to anyone involved and say that that person made the whole thing up and even if they don't they will argue that this type of quid pro quo "happens all the time" or "doesn't rise to the level of an impeachable offense." They're doing this shit already.

Again, it doesn't fucking matter what the pretext is or even that there is a pretext. And the fact that you think the one they came up with is even halfway decent means you're either completely brain-dead as to what is happening or insane.

TM

[ThurgreedMarshall]

This is why Republicans can use any pretext they want.

https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/...newday-vpx.cnn

Any argument that they need a good one or that the one they chose is effective is ridiculous. These people are fucking dumb as bricks. And the dumbest ones (and I'm not being unfair--uneducated whites are the dumbest, most racist voting block in this country) make up the base of the Republican Party.

TM

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

There's absolutely evidence adequate enough to assert there might have been coordination or orchestration.

Thanks for clarifying the kind of nonsense you're peddling. Go ahead and assert whatever you want, but one of the risks of making those kinds of arguments is that you lose all credibility. That doesn't trouble people who argue in bad faith, and it doesn't seem to trouble you.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

I am saying I could make that argument effectively, regardless of its truth.

[Did you just call me Coltrane?]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

Anyone remember when LTers was ABBA or GwNC telling fuck stories?

Apparently there are 49 bots viewing the fashionable board. Probably trying to find out if Sebby still hates spread collars.