Impeachment Trial

[Methais]

https://media3.giphy.com/media/Pbxj4ujhKth8Q/source.gif


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X9iEGvIrntU

[Gelston]

1/10. Boring.

[Methais]

1/10. Boring.

https://media1.giphy.com/media/YWwYgeKquXKJq/giphy.gif

[Tgo01]

Has Trump been removed from office? Did we save our Democracy from the best economy ever and the most peaceful time in our country in decades? Have we removed Pence too so we can swear in Pelosi?

[Ashlander]

Has Trump been removed from office? Did we save our Democracy from the best economy ever and the most peaceful time in our country in decades? Have we removed Pence too so we can swear in Pelosi?

How much longer until Hillary is crowned?

[Tgo01]

How much longer until Hillary is crowned?

Any day now! I’m with her!

[Tgo01]

"The President's misconduct cannot be decided at the ballot box, for we cannot be assured that the vote will be fairly won." -- Adam Schitthead

Remember in 2016 all of the Democrats were saying shit like "It's not rigged, you're just losing!" and insisting American elections were so perfect that it was impossible to cheat?

Well now they are saying Trump must be impeached because he is going to somehow cheat to win the next election.

Glad to see Democrats are at least being honest in the Senate in regards to their corrupt impeachment hoax. "We can't let the voters decide on this issue because they might reelect Trump!!!! We know better than the voters!!!!!!!"

In other news:

CNN "journalist" on Twitter who used to be Clinton's communications director (because of course!):


Overheard convo between two Republican Senators who only watch Fox News. "is this stuff real? I haven't heard any of this before. I thought it was all about a server. If half the stuff Schiff is saying is true, we're up shit's creek. Hope the White House has exculpatory evidence

Then after this tweet got thousands of likes and retweets he follows up with:


Ok maybe I made up the convo, but you know that's exactly what they're thinking.

Journalism!

Holy shit. Just realized this is the same "journalist" who suggested Ted Cruz should go to jail because his Twitter account was tweeting during the impeachment trial.

[~Rocktar~]

This is a far more entertaining circus to watch. Too bad they were killed off by animal rights activists.


https://youtu.be/aUhXeYkFhf4

[Parkbandit]

This is a far more entertaining circus to watch. Too bad they were killed off by animal rights activists.


https://youtu.be/aUhXeYkFhf4


I'm fine with the circus going out of business. By most accounts, they treated their animals poorly.

[Methais]

I'm fine with the circus going out of business. By most accounts, they treated their animals poorly.

This is correct.

[~Rocktar~]

Is it truly over? Can we get past this shit show and they can stop wasting our time and money?


https://youtu.be/K8JVeNIHnjY

[RichardCranium]

Is it truly over? Can we get past this shit show and they can stop wasting our time and money?


https://youtu.be/K8JVeNIHnjY

I was told there would be a third, fourth and even fifth articles of inpeachment.

[Gelston]

I hope Republicans retake the house, or at least get enough seats back to block further impeachments, because you know they are going to try that shit again.

[Archigeek]

Senate Republicans have 23 incumbent seats up for reelection to only 12 for Democrats.

All seats in the house are up for reelection.

So purely by the odds, the Republican party is likely to lose seats in the Senate and probably gain a few in the house.

As for impeachments, if reelected, Trump will probably be the first president to be impeached more than once.

[Gelston]

As for impeachments, if reelected, Trump will probably be the first president to be impeached more than once.

And that is why I think the impeachments are purely anti-democratic.

[ClydeR]

https://i.imgur.com/Dc0q6mb.png
https://twitter.com/DonaldJTrumpJr/status/1225146642527113216

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

I think it's in the best interests of the republican party for the dems to create some more articles of impeachment over the next 9 months.

[Jank]

Everyone should watch the Romney speech (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s-rnsJo0_yI), which will go down in history

[~Rocktar~]

Everyone should watch the Romney speech (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s-rnsJo0_yI), which will go down in history

Almost as far down as Romney went on Pelosi.

[Neveragain]

Everyone should watch the Romney speech (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s-rnsJo0_yI), which will go down in history

I don't have any problem with Romney deciding to vote his conscious.

My problem with Romney is, the left will tout this speech for the moment. The moment Romney runs for office again, the left will immediately attack him for his religious views that brought him to his decision.

Romney should also be using his religious views to question why tax dollars are being used to fund war in the first place. This is ultimately the flaw in Romney's thinking.

[Parkbandit]

I don't have any problem with Romney deciding to vote his conscious.

My problem with Romney is, the left will tout this speech for the moment. The moment Romney runs for office again, the left will immediately attack him for his religious views that brought him to his decision.

Romney should also be using his religious views to question why tax dollars are being used to fund war in the first place. This is ultimately the flaw in Romney's thinking.

Romney has always been out of touch with his constituents and always about himself first and foremost.

But yea.. "God told him" to vote for guilty.......

[ClydeR]

It's payback time!




https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EQFBT8vUEAEdggz?format=png&name=small

[Parkbandit]

Everyone should watch the Romney speech (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s-rnsJo0_yI), which will go down in history

Doesn't everything "go down in history"?

[Parkbandit]

Senate Republicans have 23 incumbent seats up for reelection to only 12 for Democrats.

All seats in the house are up for reelection.

So purely by the odds, the Republican party is likely to lose seats in the Senate and probably gain a few in the house.

As for impeachments, if reelected, Trump will probably be the first president to be impeached more than once.

Impeachment will be use more and more as a political tool to change the outcome of elections.

[Gelston]

I like how people are acting like what Romney did was super historical and shit. It is going to be a footnote on a Wikipedia page. Nothing more.

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

I like how people are acting like what Romney did was super historical and shit. It is going to be a footnote on a Wikipedia page. Nothing more.

Remember when Dem's villainized him as a racist, womanizing, animal abusing candidate?

How do we keep re electing these assholes?

[Gelston]

Remember when Dem's villainized him as a racist, womanizing, animal abusing candidate?

How do we keep re electing these assholes?

Trump helped his campaign. That is why he was elected. This is, of course, after Trump dangled Secretary of State infront of him, wined him, dined him, and then told him to fuck off, so Mitt is a little upset about that.

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

Oh I didn't mean just Mitt. I mean all the libtards who think he walks on water now, but 8 years ago called him all the things I said before. We need term limits, and I personally believe all members of congress should be under oath at all times, so we can litigate and jail them when they just go saying whatever they want to further their political needs.

[Gelston]

Oh I didn't mean just Mitt. I mean all the libtards who think he walks on water now, but 8 years ago called him all the things I said before. We need term limits, and I personally believe all members of congress should be under oath at all times, so we can litigate and jail them when they just go saying whatever they want to further their political needs.

I'd love term limits, but that isn't going to happen. As for the Oath part, no. Maybe if they are speaking in an official capacity, but not just for idle chatter. That seems highly Unconstitutional to me.

[Parkbandit]

Remember when Dem's villainized him as a racist, womanizing, animal abusing candidate?

How do we keep re electing these assholes?

Once you get in office, you have a distinct advantage over people trying to take your seat.

TERM
LIMITS

Nancy Fucking Pelosi has been in the House for 30+ years and has amassed quite a fortune being a "public servant".

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

I'd love term limits, but that isn't going to happen. As for the Oath part, no. Maybe if they are speaking in an official capacity, but not just for idle chatter. That seems highly Unconstitutional to me.

Like when Harry Reid lied on the floor of congress. Or Shifft. Or anyone. When in congress, should always be the truth and nothing but... NOT opinion.

[Gelston]

Like when Harry Reid lied on the floor of congress. Or Shifft. Or anyone. When in congress, should always be the truth and nothing but... NOT opinion.

Oh, I agree on that. I think any official statement by any elected official should be held to the same standard as a court testimony.

[Jeril]

Oh, I agree on that. I think any official statement by any elected official should be held to the same standard as a court testimony.

What if them telling the truth will jeopardize national security? It isn't a good thing to always tell the truth, this nation of idiots can't handle it.

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

What if them telling the truth will jeopardize national security? It isn't a good thing to always tell the truth, this nation of idiots can't handle it.

Then they say I can disclose that in a secure setting.

[Gelston]

What if them telling the truth will jeopardize national security? It isn't a good thing to always tell the truth, this nation of idiots can't handle it.

Yeah, then don't talk about it. They can always decide not to speak on a subject at all. Plus, it still has to be proven they lied, mitigating or extreme circumstances can be handled in the court or the prosecutor can be brief and not bring charges in the first place for such instances.

[Stanley Burrell]

I don't get what would have/could have possibly happened, if anything, if the seventeen or whatever witnesses were allowed to testify. Again, some of these folks to me (and it doesn't seem like a copout) revealing their identities and particular motives could *perhaps* jeopardize national security. And what the balancing act is during an impeachment trial like this one and stuff like Bolton's book? I vaguely remember one of the SEAL team dudes' in the raid that killed OBL having gotten into trouble. I don't know if that's a fair comparison.

f

[Stanley Burrell]

^ Er, rather that one of the SEALs was writing a book on how exactly the operation was conducted. My bad, bleeargh.

[Gelston]

I don't get what would have/could have possibly happened, if anything, if the seventeen or whatever witnesses were allowed to testify. Again, some of these folks to me (and it doesn't seem like a copout) revealing their identities and particular motives could *perhaps* jeopardize national security. And what the balancing act is during an impeachment trial like this one and stuff like Bolton's book? I vaguely remember one of the SEAL team dudes' in the raid that killed OBL having gotten into trouble. I don't know if that's a fair comparison.

f

The problem was they could have been called to testify during the impeachment proceedings. The object of the trial is not to introduce new evidence, that should already have been done.

[Stanley Burrell]

The problem was they could have been called to testify during the impeachment proceedings. The object of the trial is not to introduce new evidence, that should already have been done.

With my background, I'm pretty uncertain how trials (especially this one) goooes…

Like, all I can think of is Law and Order: SVU where they're already in the courtroom and new evidence appears and the prosecution is like, "We will introduce blah-blah-blah and so-and-so."

So. Yeah :-\

[Stanley Burrell]

Wait, I think I get you.

So, that evidence already existed and hadn't been doctored or manipulated in any fashion and it wasn't called into question for the hearing in a timely manner like it should have (could have) been? Er?

[Gelston]

Wait, I think I get you.

So, that evidence already existed and hadn't been doctored or manipulated in any fashion and it wasn't called into question for the hearing in a timely manner like it should have (could have) been? Er?

The investigatory phase is basically what the House did, and they voted on impeachment, or indictment. Which means their investigatory phase is done. They are supposed to already have all the evidence they needed when they sent it to the Senate. If they didn't feel they had enough yet, they shouldn't have voted yet. It isn't on the Senate to investigate, it is on them to try.

[Methais]

Everyone should watch the Romney speech (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s-rnsJo0_yI), which will go down in history

Remember how in 2012 Mitt was a horrible hate filled racist though?

[Methais]

I'd love term limits, but that isn't going to happen. As for the Oath part, no. Maybe if they are speaking in an official capacity, but not just for idle chatter. That seems highly Unconstitutional to me.

When they're in the House/Senate doing House/Senate things, or doing anything in an official "at work" capacity, they should be under oath. Otherwise you get retarded shit like Schiff.

If they're at home masturbating or cybering in GS or whatever, they're not doing Congress stuff, so who cares.

[Methais]

Wait, I think I get you.

So, that evidence already existed and hadn't been doctored or manipulated in any fashion and it wasn't called into question for the hearing in a timely manner like it should have (could have) been? Er?

House democrats said a million times during the inquiry that they had all the evidence they need and have overwhelmingly proven their case.

If that's the case, then why would they need new witnesses?

[Archigeek]

The investigatory phase is basically what the House did, and they voted on impeachment, or indictment. Which means their investigatory phase is done. They are supposed to already have all the evidence they needed when they sent it to the Senate. If they didn't feel they had enough yet, they shouldn't have voted yet. It isn't on the Senate to investigate, it is on them to try.

There is nothing in the constitution that says the Senate can't add or look at additional evidence. In fact, if you look at the precedence, they probably look at additional evidence, including witnesses in most impeachment trials. The reason they didn't look at witnesses was political. Keep in mind though that it is supposed to be a political process. If the framers of the constitution wanted a less political trial they would have put it in the hands of the supreme court.

Personally I thought the house presented their case too hastily. It was always a foregone conclusion that short of an absolute bombshell, he was not going to be removed from office.

[Neveragain]

Trump’s Treasury Department is now helping a Hunter Biden probe


The U.S. Treasury Department has started turning over confidential banking records related to Hunter Biden in response to requests from Senate investigative committees.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/politics/confidential-banking-records-related-to-hunter-biden-in-senate-hands-report

https://media.giphy.com/media/xZRY1EKZYkRxK/giphy.gif

[Methais]

There is nothing in the constitution that says the Senate can't add or look at additional evidence. In fact, if you look at the precedence, they probably look at additional evidence, including witnesses in most impeachment trials. The reason they didn't look at witnesses was political. Keep in mind though that it is supposed to be a political process. If the framers of the constitution wanted a less political trial they would have put it in the hands of the supreme court.

Personally I thought the house presented their case too hastily. It was always a foregone conclusion that short of an absolute bombshell, he was not going to be removed from office.

Yeah but...the House said they had all the evidence they needed and have overwhelmingly proven their case. Why would they need more witnesses if that were the case?

They shot themselves in the foot with that retarded bullshit and now they're salty about it because it backfired.

[Gelston]

There is nothing in the constitution that says the Senate can't add or look at additional evidence. In fact, if you look at the precedence, they probably look at additional evidence, including witnesses in most impeachment trials. The reason they didn't look at witnesses was political. Keep in mind though that it is supposed to be a political process. If the framers of the constitution wanted a less political trial they would have put it in the hands of the supreme court.

Personally I thought the house presented their case too hastily. It was always a foregone conclusion that short of an absolute bombshell, he was not going to be removed from office.

No, there isn't, but it is considered a court at this time. It is pretty much common sense that the House needs to have all of their ducks in a row before they send it to the Senate. Again, the Senate isn't there to investigate, the House does that. The Senate is there to decide if what the House uncovered is legitimate and if there was a contactable offense.

[Archigeek]

No, there isn't, but it is considered a court at this time. It is pretty much common sense that the House needs to have all of their ducks in a row before they send it to the Senate. Again, the Senate isn't there to investigate, the House does that. The Senate is there to decide if what the House uncovered is legitimate and if there was a contactable offense.

Like I said, most of the time they look at witnesses/more evidence, granted most of the time it's not a presidential impeachment, it's some judge. There really is no "common sense" on this, it doesn't happen enough. Personally I thought John Robert's should have required witnesses, which he could have done as the presiding judge, but he made the decision to stay out of a political process, and you can't really blame him too much for that.

I'll reiterate that I thought the house should have just drawn this out, slowly and painfully. So now we get the slow revelation of the evidence after the trial is over.

[Archigeek]

Yeah but...the House said they had all the evidence they needed and have overwhelmingly proven their case. Why would they need more witnesses if that were the case?

They shot themselves in the foot with that retarded bullshit and now they're salty about it because it backfired.

They did kind of box themselves into a corner with that, but it was also obvious that we didn't see witnesses because the Senate Republicans didn't want to see them, not because there wasn't new and important information that should have been heard. Republicans new that if the door to witnesses was opened, this thing would have drawn out another couple of weeks at least, and what evidence would show up would be out of their control.

[Gelston]

Like I said, most of the time they look at witnesses/more evidence, granted most of the time it's not a presidential impeachment, it's some judge. There really is no "common sense" on this, it doesn't happen enough. Personally I thought John Robert's should have required witnesses, which he could have done as the presiding judge, but he made the decision to stay out of a political process, and you can't really blame him too much for that.

I'll reiterate that I thought the house should have just drawn this out, slowly and painfully. So now we get the slow revelation of the evidence after the trial is over.

He could not have done it if the Senate told him no. Conviction is done solely on the authority of the Senate. They make the rules. Then Judicial branch isn't even required to be there. The Constitution doesn't even lay out how a trial works for Impeachment proceedings. To be frank, the Senate could vote on it the day it shows up if they made such rules, which the Senate is allowed to do as the Constitution allows them to set their own rules.

[Jank]

Remember how in 2012 Mitt was a horrible hate filled racist though?

I never thought so. I'm sure plenty of people in this thread voted for him.


Doesn't everything "go down in history"?

Some things more than others. I think it is an important moment.

[Jank]

Just found out about this slam video of Romney tweeted by Trump (https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1225203837226700800?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw)

I have posted links to two videos. Which one do you like more?

[Tgo01]

This video perfectly sums up the current state of the evil Democrats:

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1225553117929988097?s=20

[Methais]

They did kind of box themselves into a corner with that, but it was also obvious that we didn't see witnesses because the Senate Republicans didn't want to see them, not because there wasn't new and important information that should have been heard. Republicans new that if the door to witnesses was opened, this thing would have drawn out another couple of weeks at least, and what evidence would show up would be out of their control.

They were saying they proved everything before it was even brought to the Senate. Before the House even voted on it I'm pretty sure.

[rolfard]

Oops this premeditated ripping made me laugh. Gottem



https://youtu.be/LueAAY1no9Y
https://twitter.com/i/status/1225561663216267265

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

Oops this premeditated ripping made me laugh.

Her chewing on her dentures the whole speech made me laugh.

[Wrathbringer]

They did kind of box themselves into a corner with that, but it was also obvious that we didn't see witnesses because the Senate Republicans didn't want to see them, not because there wasn't new and important information that should have been heard. Republicans new that if the door to witnesses was opened, this thing would have drawn out another couple of weeks at least, and what evidence would show up would be out of their control.

Your butthurt has been noted, laughed at and appreciated. Now, if you could just fill out this form, we'll try to stop laughing long enough to help you out if we can:

https://i.imgur.com/9l2gdWA.jpg

[Parkbandit]

Her chewing on her dentures the whole speech made me laugh.

Is that what she was doing? I honestly thought she was talking to herself.

[Parkbandit]

He could not have done it if the Senate told him no. Conviction is done solely on the authority of the Senate. They make the rules. Then Judicial branch isn't even required to be there. The Constitution doesn't even lay out how a trial works for Impeachment proceedings. To be frank, the Senate could vote on it the day it shows up if they made such rules, which the Senate is allowed to do as the Constitution allows them to set their own rules.

Why would you need more witnesses to prove a case if the case had already been proven in the House?

[Methais]

Her chewing on her dentures the whole speech made me laugh.

Polident Pelosi.

https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51kBIqeq9fL._SX466_.jpg


Oops this premeditated ripping made me laugh. Gottem



https://youtu.be/LueAAY1no9Y
https://twitter.com/i/status/1225561663216267265

https://media1.tenor.com/images/3006cae3430e666e298e91637494b38c/tenor.gif?itemid=7851048

[Stanley Burrell]

Shit is fucking confusing.

Word.

[Archigeek]

He could not have done it if the Senate told him no. Conviction is done solely on the authority of the Senate. They make the rules. Then Judicial branch isn't even required to be there. The Constitution doesn't even lay out how a trial works for Impeachment proceedings. To be frank, the Senate could vote on it the day it shows up if they made such rules, which the Senate is allowed to do as the Constitution allows them to set their own rules.

Actually the constitution does provide a framework for the trial, and it expressly states that the Chief Justice is to preside over the trial. He does have to be there, and as presiding judge, he can have a lot of say over the process. He chose not to, other than some minor things.

[Gelston]

Actually the constitution does provide a framework for the trial, and it expressly states that the Chief Justice is to preside over the trial. He does have to be there, and as presiding judge, he can have a lot of say over the process. He chose not to, other than some minor things.

It provides almost no framework other than requiring 2/3s vote by the Senate, you are thinking of Jefferson's Manual. It does say the Chief Justice Presides, however, which I missed. Again, however, the Senate makes rules on how they conduct business, which is another part of the Constitution, therefor, the trial happens as they say. Hell, the Senate has completely refused to try an impeachment before.

[Tgo01]

as presiding judge, he can have a lot of say over the process.

Not really. The Senate makes their own rules and can do pretty much whatever they want. If the Senate wants to they could tell the House to shove their witness request up their ass and they have 24 hours to present their case or else they will dismiss the charges and there isn't anything the chief justice can do about it.

The Senate could vote to not even hear the articles of impeachment and acquit the president before Schiff and gang even steps foot in the Senate.

[Gelston]

Not really. The Senate makes their own rules and can do pretty much whatever they want. If the Senate wants to they could tell the House to shove their witness request up their ass and they have 24 hours to present their case or else they will dismiss the charges and there isn't anything the chief justice can do about it.

The Senate could vote to not even hear the articles of impeachment and acquit the president before Schiff and gang even steps foot in the Senate.

Nah, it specifically says in the US Constitution that the Chief Justice presides over Presidential impeachment trials. They can't overrule the Constitution. (Article I, Section 3, Clause 6)

[Methais]

Nah, it specifically says in the US Constitution that the Chief Justice presides over Presidential impeachment trials. They can't overrule the Constitution.

What if the Chief Justice has a ruthless unrelenting case of chronic diarrhea?

[Gelston]

What if the Chief Justice has a ruthless unrelenting case of chronic diarrhea?

He makes $250 grand a year, is seated for life, and can't be removed unless everyone hates him, he can suck it up.

[Tgo01]

Nah, it specifically says in the US Constitution that the Chief Justice presides over Presidential impeachment trials. They can't overrule the Constitution. (Article I, Section 3, Clause 6)

I'm only contesting the argument that the chief justice has a lot of say over the process. The chief justice has no authority over the process according to the constitution and the supreme court has almost always (always?) ruled that the House and Senate can conduct business however they want and create whatever rules they want.

[Gelston]

I'm only contesting the argument that the chief justice has a lot of say over the process. The chief justice has no authority over the process according to the constitution and the supreme court has almost always (always?) ruled that the House and Senate can conduct business however they want and create whatever rules they want.

Ah, yeah.

[Archigeek]

I'm only contesting the argument that the chief justice has a lot of say over the process. The chief justice has no authority over the process according to the constitution and the supreme court has almost always (always?) ruled that the House and Senate can conduct business however they want and create whatever rules they want.

I guess we just disagree on what it means to preside. There isn't any detail in the constitution, it just explicitly states that the chief justice will preside. I presume that presiding means the same thing it would mean in any other instance where a judge would preside. I'll concede that it appears that John Roberts mostly agrees with you.

[Tgo01]

That would be the Senate ceding its power to the judiciary, something the Senate isn’t about to do and something I doubt the judiciary wants to do.

I take that back, the Senate Democrats seemed all too eager to give up their power to the judiciary as long as they thought there was a slim hope it would help them in their fervent attempt to remove Trump and embarrass Republicans because the Democrats have lost their minds.

[Parkbandit]

I guess we just disagree on what it means to preside. There isn't any detail in the constitution, it just explicitly states that the chief justice will preside. I presume that presiding means the same thing it would mean in any other instance where a judge would preside. I'll concede that it appears that John Roberts mostly agrees with you.

Preside doesn't mean you get to make the rules up... it just means that here are the rules, and you are in charge of making sure those rules you were given are followed.

He's like a referee in a football game. He didn't make up the rules.. the NFL did. He just needs to make sure the players follow those rules.

[Methais]

Impeachment 2.0? Democrats line up possible new charges against Trump (https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/feb/6/second-impeachment-could-be-on-horizon-for-trump)

https://media.giphy.com/media/jQmVFypWInKCc/giphy.gif

[Neveragain]

Impeachment 2.0? Democrats line up possible new charges against Trump (https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/feb/6/second-impeachment-could-be-on-horizon-for-trump)

https://media.giphy.com/media/jQmVFypWInKCc/giphy.gif

I think if we move right back into a new string of impeachment hearings, the states need to start withholding federal dollars from DC.

[TrumpTweets]

So where are we now?

First he's innocent. Then there isn't enough evidence. Then there isn't enough first hand evidence. Then they gave up and admitted Trump was guilty but that he couldn't be impeached for it. And now Trump is back to claiming he's innocent again and these officials lied under oath.

They can't have it both ways. If he's guilty (which the Senate GOP admitted by the end of the trial) than the people who testified against him all told the truth.... and two so far have been fired for it.

Trump is now firing his own officials for doing their jobs and telling the truth. Basically, if you choose America over Trump, he will call you disloyal and destroy you. And that's our President folks; as anti-America as it gets.

[Gelston]

So where are we now?

First he's innocent. Then there isn't enough evidence. Then there isn't enough first hand evidence. Then they gave up and admitted Trump was guilty but that he couldn't be impeached for it. And now Trump is back to claiming he's innocent again and these officials lied under oath.

They can't have it both ways. If he's guilty (which the Senate GOP admitted by the end of the trial) than the people who testified against him all told the truth.... and two so far have been fired for it.

Trump is now firing his own officials for doing their jobs and telling the truth. Basically, if you choose America over Trump, he will call you disloyal and destroy you. And that's our President folks; as anti-America as it gets.

You're innocent until proven guilty. He wasn't found guilty. He is innocent, regardless of any double speak. End of story.

[Gelston]

I guess we just disagree on what it means to preside. There isn't any detail in the constitution, it just explicitly states that the chief justice will preside. I presume that presiding means the same thing it would mean in any other instance where a judge would preside. I'll concede that it appears that John Roberts mostly agrees with you.

He ONLY presides over Presidential Impeachments. Anyone can preside over other, lesser impeachments. Technically, the President can preside over a VP impeachment. It isn't meant to cede any power to the Judicial. He just enforces the rules the Senate creates, which again, is a power granted to them by the Constitution.

[TrumpTweets]

You're innocent until proven guilty. He wasn't found guilty. He is innocent, regardless of any double speak. End of story.

Don't trials usually have witnesses?

[Tgo01]

The House impeachment goons are doing the "news" circuit claiming Trump wasn't really acquitted because it wasn't "a fair trial."

Since when does the prosecution get to claim that a trial "wasn't fair"? That's a term that gets tossed around when people think the accused didn't get a fair trial.

[Gelston]

Don't trials usually have witnesses?

They have verdicts. And he was found not guilty.

How about them gas prices though? I'm glad you saved that statement I made.

[Astray]

Oh hey, Backkkstuff1 is here to enlighten us with his retardation.

[Methais]

So where are we now?

First he's innocent. Then there isn't enough evidence. Then there isn't enough first hand evidence. Then they gave up and admitted Trump was guilty but that he couldn't be impeached for it. And now Trump is back to claiming he's innocent again and these officials lied under oath.

They can't have it both ways. If he's guilty (which the Senate GOP admitted by the end of the trial) than the people who testified against him all told the truth.... and two so far have been fired for it.

Trump is now firing his own officials for doing their jobs and telling the truth. Basically, if you choose America over Trump, he will call you disloyal and destroy you. And that's our President folks; as anti-America as it gets.

Shut up macbacKKKstuff14funpkwolff

[Neveragain]

Don't trials usually have witnesses?

Remember when the house wouldn't allow Republicans to do any questioning?

At this point it's fuck off mode.

Democrats made their bed.

[TrumpTweets]

They have verdicts. And he was found not guilty.

How about them gas prices though? I'm glad you saved that statement I made.

So you support trials without witnesses? Do you also support familial punishment?

[TrumpTweets]

Remember when the house wouldn't allow Republicans to do any questioning?

At this point it's fuck off mode.

Democrats made their bed.

At least we made a bed, unlike conservatives who have been shitting in one for the past 60 years.

[Tgo01]

sellstuff1 is just so boring and predictable now.

It's just a matter of minutes before he starts raging and calling everyone a racist redneck.

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

I'm just waiting for like 8 posts in a row of him losing his shit because... well... imagine being trapped in your Mom's basement for 20 years and only having a fleshlight for company, and being a communist racist asshole.

[Astray]

sellstuff1 is just so boring and predictable now.

It's just a matter of minutes before he starts raging and calling everyone a racist redneck.

He still won't take me up for a steak dinner. :[

[Neveragain]

At least we made a bed, unlike conservatives who have been shitting in one for the past 60 years.

Is it any coincidence that Nancy Pelosi's district needs an active map to avoid the shit?

[Methais]

sellstuff1 is just so boring and predictable now.

It's just a matter of minutes before he starts raging and calling everyone niggers.

Fixed.

[Methais]

At least we made a bed, unlike conservatives who have been shitting in one for the past 60 years.

Why don’t you just make your new accounts in sequential order whenever your previous accounts get banned for sucking at life? sellstuff2, sellstuff3, etc.

[Voldemort]

Why don’t you just make your new accounts in sequential order whenever your previous accounts get banned for sucking at life? sellstuff2, sellstuff3, etc.

Methais, please, it will greatly help if you take out the two dicks in your asshole, you’ll be much less irritable.

[Back]

Here we see how money corrupts the system.

The republicans only gave Trump a pass because their donors would have stopped the flow of money into their reelection campaigns. Moscow Mitch has his hand on the campaign money spigot and every single republican senator, except Romney, needs that money to stay in power so they lockstep behind Trump for that yummy corporate money which they then give to Facebook to target you with political ads.

People can distract all they want but it still stands. Trump used congressionally approved taxpayer money for aid to a democratic ally against Russian aggression to bribe that ally into investigating a private American citizen's business dealings despite having the entire executive branch at his disposal. So now we have helped Russia by denying the aid, sent the signal that we are witholding aid for personal favors from our own allies, are breaking up NATO which further helps Russia by alienating them, and will destroy the careers of anyone getting in the way or telling the truth about what is happening.

I know people love Trump because of tears from the left. When is enough enough? If the left were to say they did not want a dictator would the right install a dictator just to see the left's tears? How do you consider hate and spite a political ideology?

[Tgo01]

The republicans only gave Trump a pass because their donors would have stopped the flow of money into their reelection campaigns.

It's like your entire "news" feed is just DNC announcements and articles from Share Blue.

[Methais]

Methais, please, it will greatly help if you take out the two dicks in your asshole, you’ll be much less irritable.

https://media.giphy.com/media/JwNPAckJDiPsI/giphy.gif

[Methais]

Here we see how money corrupts the system.

The republicans only gave Trump a pass because their donors would have stopped the flow of money into their reelection campaigns. Moscow Mitch has his hand on the campaign money spigot and every single republican senator, except Romney, needs that money to stay in power so they lockstep behind Trump for that yummy corporate money which they then give to Facebook to target you with political ads.

People can distract all they want but it still stands. Trump used congressionally approved taxpayer money for aid to a democratic ally against Russian aggression to bribe that ally into investigating a private American citizen's business dealings despite having the entire executive branch at his disposal. So now we have helped Russia by denying the aid, sent the signal that we are witholding aid for personal favors from our own allies, are breaking up NATO which further helps Russia by alienating them, and will destroy the careers of anyone getting in the way or telling the truth about what is happening.

I know people love Trump because of tears from the left. When is enough enough? If the left were to say they did not want a dictator would the right install a dictator just to see the left's tears? How do you consider hate and spite a political ideology?

When was the last time someone else didn’t do all your thinking for you?

[Back]

It's like your entire "news" feed is just DNC announcements and articles from Share Blue.

Plenty of republican senators have said what he did was wrong but not impeachable. Plenty of republican senators talked shit about Trump before he was elected but now shield him. Its pretty obvious to me and everyone else out there with a brain that the republicans have sold their souls to the orange devil.

[Methais]

Plenty of republican senators have said what he did was wrong but not impeachable. Plenty of republican senators talked shit about Trump before he was elected but now shield him. Its pretty obvious to me and everyone else out there with a brain that the republicans have sold their souls to the orange devil.

Why would the House managers need more witnesses after saying multiple times during the House inquiry that they had all the evidence they needed and had already overwhelmingly proven their case?

[Tgo01]

Plenty of republican senators have said what he did was wrong but not impeachable.

By "plenty" you mean like 2? And isn't the fact that they think it wasn't impeachable mean they wouldn't vote to remove him from office? They probably also thought it was wrong when Obama was busy droning US citizens to death but didn't remove him from office either.


Plenty of republican senators talked shit about Trump before he was elected but now shield him.

Who gives a flying fuck you worthless cunt? I wasn't too thrilled with Trump during the 2016 election either but now I think he's a great president. People are allowed to change their minds, oh wait, I guess only Democrats are allowed to do that when they have to virtue signal to get reelected.

[Neveragain]

Here we see how money corrupts the system.

The republicans only gave Trump a pass because their donors would have stopped the flow of money into their reelection campaigns. Moscow Mitch has his hand on the campaign money spigot and every single republican senator, except Romney, needs that money to stay in power so they lockstep behind Trump for that yummy corporate money which they then give to Facebook to target you with political ads.

People can distract all they want but it still stands. Trump used congressionally approved taxpayer money for aid to a democratic ally against Russian aggression to bribe that ally into investigating a private American citizen's business dealings despite having the entire executive branch at his disposal. So now we have helped Russia by denying the aid, sent the signal that we are witholding aid for personal favors from our own allies, are breaking up NATO which further helps Russia by alienating them, and will destroy the careers of anyone getting in the way or telling the truth about what is happening.

I know people love Trump because of tears from the left. When is enough enough? If the left were to say they did not want a dictator would the right install a dictator just to see the left's tears? How do you consider hate and spite a political ideology?

I know you guys hate Trump because you lost an election. When is enough, enough? If the right were to say they don't want a self declared socialist, would the left install a self declared socialist just because they lost an election?.............oh wait.

I just find it curious that the Democrats don't want to investigate the 1.8 billion dollars (how many blankets did they need?) that vanished. Oh well, they don't have a choice in the matter now.

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

Backrash can't comprehend that when votes go 100% partyline, literally no elected officials are voting their conscience. He actually believe 100% dems believe Trump committed a crime, and that 100% repubs are lying to America.

[Voldemort]

Why would the House managers need more witnesses after saying multiple times during the House inquiry that they had all the evidence they needed and had already overwhelmingly proven their case?

Actual video of Methais attempting to make an argument:

https://i.giphy.com/media/HZAzBllQJ2B1K/source.gif

[Parkbandit]

Methais, please, it will greatly help if you take out the two dicks in your asshole, you’ll be much less irritable.

Speaking of losers who should make new accounts in sequential order when he gets banned.

Hey MacGuyver.

[RichardCranium]

Backrash can't comprehend that when votes go 100% partyline, literally no elected officials are voting their conscience. He actually believe 100% dems believe Trump committed a crime, and that 100% repubs are lying to America.

He also doesn't understand how the electoral college works, what gerrymandering is, or what constitutes fascism so...par for the course.

[Parkbandit]

Plenty of republican senators have said what he did was wrong but not impeachable.

It wasn't illegal. Probably in the gray area of things not to do or say... but it certainly isn't an impeachable offense, which you wanted it to be.


Plenty of republican senators talked shit about Trump before he was elected but now shield him. Its pretty obvious to me and everyone else out there with a brain that the republicans have sold their souls to the orange devil.

You realize that everyone who is running for the nomination and their supporters talks shit about the other ones running.. so they can get nominated, right?

It's like this is your first Presidential election ever.. or you are just that blissfully ignorant to the process.

[Ashlander]

It's like this is your first Presidential election ever.. or you are just that blissfully ignorant to the process.

There's nothing blissful about his ignorance.

[Back]

I know you guys hate Trump because you lost an election. When is enough, enough? If the right were to say they don't want a self declared socialist, would the left install a self declared socialist just because they lost an election?.............oh wait.

I just find it curious that the Democrats don't want to investigate the 1.8 billion dollars (how many blankets did they need?) that vanished. Oh well, they don't have a choice in the matter now.

The democrats want a socialist, or socialism, so that EVERYONE gets a better quality of life, even republicans. Its not some spiteful baby tantrum designed to elicit tears from a perceived enemy like it seems it is from some republicans on this board who have stated their sole purpose in politics is to see liberal tears.

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

The democrats want a socialist, or socialism, so that EVERYONE gets a better quality of life, even republicans.

Really. Explain, specifically, how my life will be better under socialism?

[Tgo01]

Really. Explain, specifically, how my life will be better under socialism?

All of your money will be taken away and given to dregs such as Back so he can blow it all in less than a month. Since you won't have any money anymore that is one less thing in life to worry about.

Win/win all around!

[Wrathbringer]

The democrats want a socialist, or socialism, so that EVERYONE gets a better quality of life, even republicans. Its not some spiteful baby tantrum designed to elicit tears from a perceived enemy like it seems it is from some republicans on this board who have stated their sole purpose in politics is to see liberal tears.

Hey, Back, glad you're here. Let's review the scoreboard for the last 3+ years just for fun, then you tell us on a scale of 1-10 exactly how butthurt you are just so we have some idea about how far you actually have left before achieving maximum butthurt. Ok, here we go: Election: Trump wins and becomes your president. Russian Conspiracy: False. Obstruction of Mueller's Investigation: False. Mueller's investigation: Trump vindicated. Wall: Built. Borders: Secured. Criminal Aliens: Deported. Supreme Court Justice Kavanaugh: Confirmed. Supreme Court Justice Gorsuch: Confirmed. Corrupt Partisan Impeachment Attempt: Acquitted. I now await your butthurt rating.

[Astray]

Hey, Back, glad you're here. Let's review the scoreboard for the last 3+ years just for fun, then you tell us on a scale of 1-10 exactly how butthurt you are just so we have some idea about how far you actually have left before achieving maximum butthurt. Ok, here we go: Election: Trump wins and becomes your president. Russian Conspiracy: False. Obstruction of Mueller's Investigation: False. Mueller's investigation: Trump vindicated. Wall: Built. Borders: Secured. Criminal Aliens: Deported. Supreme Court Justice Kavanaugh: Confirmed. Supreme Court Justice Gorsuch: Confirmed. Corrupt Partisan Impeachment Attempt: Acquitted. I now await your butthurt rating.

His butthurt rating is so high he can barely keep an argument together.

So probably 68307587450397503 on a scale of 10.

[Wrathbringer]

His butthurt rating is so high he can barely keep an argument together.

So probably 68307587450397503 on a scale of 10.

You must spread some exquisitely rare Green Shart Rep around before giving it to Astray again.

[Parkbandit]

The democrats want a socialist, or socialism, so that EVERYONE gets a better quality of life, even republicans.

Can you show me a specific example of socialism that this was true?

If need be, I can show you many examples of how the exact opposite of this was true.


Its not some spiteful baby tantrum designed to elicit tears from a perceived enemy like it seems it is from some republicans on this board who have stated their sole purpose in politics is to see liberal tears.

It's mine. I love it when you get so upset over something that doesn't effect you at all that you literally cry.

[Methais]

Actual video of me begging Methais to pay attention to me because dreaming about having his ginormous peen in my mouth every day in hopes that one day it will happen for real is the only thing keeping me from killing myself irl:

https://media2.giphy.com/media/UipxfcxQmadkA/giphy.gif

This is correct.

[Methais]

The democrats want a socialist, or socialism, so that EVERYONE is under government control. But it relies on voters like me who are failures at life and think we'll get free stuff because we're really really stupid and have never held a position higher than bus boy, and so far we haven't reproduced enough because the kind of people that we find sexually attractive aren't old enough to reproduce.

This is correct.

[Seran]

The democrats want a socialist, or socialism, so that EVERYONE gets a better quality of life, even republicans. Its not some spiteful baby tantrum designed to elicit tears from a perceived enemy like it seems it is from some republicans on this board who have stated their sole purpose in politics is to see liberal tears.

Rich Democrats want Socialism so they can force everyone to pay for funding the laziness and corruption equally, rather than pledging their own wealth to charitable causes.

Poor Democrats want Socialism because they're tired of their cost of living adjustments failing to keep up with price inflation and rental market speculation due to the Rich Democrats buying investment properties.

Republicans want Socialism advocating opponents because they can easily get reelected that way.

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

Rich Democrats want Socialism so they can force everyone to pay for funding the laziness and corruption equally, rather than pledging their own wealth to charitable causes.

Poor Democrats want Socialism because they're tired of their cost of living adjustments failing to keep up with price inflation and rental market speculation due to the Rich Democrats buying investment properties.

Republicans want Socialism advocating opponents because they can easily get reelected that way.

I actually agree with most of this.

[Methais]

Rich Democrats want Socialism so they can force everyone to pay for funding the laziness and corruption equally, rather than pledging their own wealth to charitable causes.

Poor Democrats want Socialism because they're tired of their cost of living adjustments failing to keep up with price inflation and rental market speculation due to the Rich Democrats buying investment properties.

Republicans want Socialism advocating opponents because they can easily get reelected that way.

https://media0.giphy.com/media/fdyZ3qI0GVZC0/giphy.gif

[Back]

Using our resources to benefit everyone in society is good for a healthy country. If everyone has healthcare, something to eat, a place to live, clothes to wear, a way to get around, an education, and a good job, we're golden. It makes no sense for someone to be able to amass so much wealth that they will never spend it in their lifetime. That wealth just sits doing no good to anyone. Take some of that off the top, the top won't even feel it, and give it back to the people who spent it making the top rich in the first place. Provide healthcare, housing, education to start. Money comes out of everyone's pockets so the rich can be rich. Skim a little off the top so everyone can have a little easier go at life.

[Gelston]

Using our resources to benefit everyone in society is good for a healthy country. If everyone has healthcare, something to eat, a place to live, clothes to wear, a way to get around, an education, and a good job, we're golden. It makes no sense for someone to be able to amass so much wealth that they will never spend it in their lifetime. That wealth just sits doing no good to anyone. Take some of that off the top, the top won't even feel it, and give it back to the people who spent it making the top rich in the first place. Provide healthcare, housing, education to start. Money comes out of everyone's pockets so the rich can be rich. Skim a little off the top so everyone can have a little easier go at life.

It worked so great for the Soviet Union.

[Back]

It worked so great for the Soviet Union.

Corruption will fuck anything up. Take a look at the White House right now.

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

a good job

If everyone has a "good" job, who does the shitty jobs?

You are so fucking stupid.

[Astray]

If everyone has a "good" job, who does the shitty jobs?

You are so fucking stupid.

Back wants the government to assign people jobs. It's the only way he could get out of busboy duty.

[Neveragain]

That wealth just sits doing no good to anyone.

Yes, people become billionaires by stuffing all their ill gotten money in their mattress.

You're so fucking dumb.

[Back]

Why am I not surprised to hear you guys job shaming. Anyone working any job should be considered a hero for doing something productive with themselves. It pisses me off when people make fun of Walmart workers, or McDonalds, or the supermarket shelf stockers, or sign spinners, or any kind of job shaming. Its fucking juvenille bullshit. Grow up.

[Alfster]

Using our resources to benefit everyone in society is good for a healthy country. If everyone has healthcare, something to eat, a place to live, clothes to wear, a way to get around, an education, and a good job, we're golden. It makes no sense for someone to be able to amass so much wealth that they will never spend it in their lifetime. That wealth just sits doing no good to anyone. Take some of that off the top, the top won't even feel it, and give it back to the people who spent it making the top rich in the first place. Provide healthcare, housing, education to start. Money comes out of everyone's pockets so the rich can be rich. Skim a little off the top so everyone can have a little easier go at life.

What's wrong with amassing wealth? What your describing is complete lunacy

I'm for single payer healthcare, but only for two reasons.

1) because it's a cheaper (factoring in employer + employee contributions) alternative than what you'd get today. The middle man has created such a clusterfuck with billing and denial of valid claims that no one knows wtf they'll be forced to pay until after the bill. Even then, they can adjust your liability on the claim for multiple years - depending on circumstances.

2) Divorcing healthcare from your employer. There's really no reason for these two to be connected.

[Alfster]

Why am I not surprised to hear you guys job shaming. Anyone working any job should be considered a hero for doing something productive with themselves. It pisses me off when people make fun of Walmart workers, or McDonalds, or the supermarket shelf stockers, or sign spinners, or any kind of job shaming. Its fucking juvenille bullshit. Grow up.

The good news here is all of those jobs you've described can be automated. Give it ten years and no one will be looking down on these people.

I'm going out on a limb and assuming you've experienced this in your line of work. It's barely complained about here - but you seem to think it's what everyone is doing.

[Neveragain]

What's wrong with amassing wealth?

It's only wrong if a person amasses more than back. So basically, the dude collecting beer cans from the side of the road will be heavily taxed in Backs version of the country.

[Back]

What's wrong with amassing wealth? What your describing is complete lunacy

I'm for single payer healthcare, but only for two reasons.

1) because it's a cheaper (factoring in employer + employee contributions) alternative than what you'd get today. The middle man has created such a clusterfuck with billing and denial of valid claims that no one knows wtf they'll be forced to pay until after the bill. Even then, they can adjust your liability on the claim for multiple years - depending on circumstances.

2) Divorcing healthcare from your employer. There's really no reason for these two to be connected.

If you take a look at my post you'll see I said nothing about amassing wealth being wrong. The current disparity is as big as its ever been. Time to cut the rest of the population in on the profits because without the population there are no profits. Its give and take and the biggest takers need to give a little back.

Healthcare is my single biggest issue currently. Its criminal how much it costs. Every single person in this country needs it from cradle to grave. Raise taxes and fold it into a system that is fair and affordable for everyone including the rich. People of course can purchase their own if they want.

[Neveragain]

If everyone has a "good" job, who does the shitty jobs?

The illegal aliens. Isn't that what the Democrats tell us?

[Back]

The good news here is all of those jobs you've described can be automated. Give it ten years and no one will be looking down on these people.

I'm going out on a limb and assuming you've experienced this in your line of work. It's barely complained about here - but you seem to think it's what everyone is doing.

Thats why I really love Yang. I'm a Yang ganger all the way. Too bad he's running for the 2120 election. Let the robots do the work so we can smoke free weed and populate the stars.

[Wrathbringer]

It's only wrong if a person amasses more than back. So basically, the dude collecting beer cans from the side of the road will be heavily taxed in Backs version of the country.

:lol:

[Astray]

The only good thing to come from 2120 is that Back will have no children to continue his retardation.

[Tgo01]

Its give and take and the biggest takers need to give a little back.

It's literally not give and take. If I earn twice as much money as you do tell me how I have "taken" anything from you?

You know absolutely nothing of what you advocate for but gosh darnit if it doesn't sound good, right?

[Neveragain]

Thats why I really love Yang. I'm a Yang ganger all the way. Too bad he's running for the 2120 election. Let the robots do the work so we can smoke free weed and populate the stars.

Get between a pothead and their weed and I will show you a true conservative.

[Astray]

It's literally not give and take. If I earn twice as much money as you do tell me how I have "taken" anything from you?

You know absolutely nothing of what you advocate for but gosh darnit if it doesn't sound good, right?

You took the opportunity to earn more money from a minority, whitey.

[Tgo01]

You took the opportunity to earn more money from a minority, whitey.

:O

[Gelston]

Corruption will fuck anything up. Take a look at the White House right now.

And you think an American version would be completely immune from corruption? No. The thing is, in our country, the Government doesn't control where you work, where you get healthcare, where you live, etc.. You're proposing that they do.

[Wrathbringer]

And you think an American version would be completely immune from corruption? No. The thing is, in our country, the Government doesn't control where you work, where you get healthcare, where you live, etc.. You're proposing that they do.

You are arguing with a retarded person.

[Astray]

:O

Now give reparations, please.

[Back]

And you think an American version would be completely immune from corruption? No. The thing is, in our country, the Government doesn't control where you work, where you get healthcare, where you live, etc.. You're proposing that they do.

I'd love to think our brand of democracy and our government's checks and balances would at least make us less corrupt than Russia or Venezuela. But lately I really don't have much faith with the current political party in power. Republicans and Trump are the most corrupt bunch of crooks this country has ever seen.

[Gelston]

I'd love to think .

And this is where you're 100% wrong about everything. And Trump and the Republicans aren't anymore corrupt than anyone else in the history of politics.

[Alfster]

If you take a look at my post you'll see I said nothing about amassing wealth being wrong. The current disparity is as big as its ever been. Time to cut the rest of the population in on the profits because without the population there are no profits. Its give and take and the biggest takers need to give a little back.

Or have the rest of the population provide a service or product that others will purchase.

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

Trump and the Republicans aren't anymore corrupt than anyone else in the history of politics.

100% truth that Backrash will never acknowledge... he thinks libs/dems walk on water and do no harm. Meanwhile, every major city occupied by democrats gets further and further in debt, decay, crime, drugs and violence.

[Methais]

Corruption will fuck anything up. Take a look at the White House right now.

Let me guess...if we can just get Trump out and vote in a democrat, all that corruption will go away and therefore free everything for everyone will be a roaring success?

[Methais]

Back wants the government to assign people jobs. It's the only way he could get out of busboy duty.

In b4 the new USSA communist government assigns Back his job as a busboy.

[Methais]

Why am I not surprised to hear you guys job shaming. Anyone working any job should be considered a hero for doing something productive with themselves. It pisses me off when people make fun of Walmart workers, or McDonalds, or the supermarket shelf stockers, or sign spinners, or any kind of job shaming. Its fucking juvenille bullshit. Grow up.

What about busboy?

THIS JUST IN: Jobs that require skills and knowledge pay more because there are less people qualified to do them. More at eleven.

Why don't we just make minimum wage $1,000,000 an hour though? Then everyone will be rich and all the world's problems will stop. Right? Isn't that what will happen? If not, why wouldn't that fix everything?

Please advise.

[Neveragain]

The current disparity is as big as its ever been

It's weird because out of the 4 states with the highest income disparity 3 of them are solid blue states.

[Methais]

Healthcare is my single biggest issue currently. Its criminal how much it costs. Every single person in this country needs it from cradle to grave. Raise taxes and fold it into a system that is fair and affordable for everyone including the rich.

Your party had their chance to make this happen when Obama had a super majority. Why are't you blaming Obama and democrats for the lack of single payer health care? They literally could have made it happen at any point during Obama's first two years in office instead of the train wreck that's Obamacare.


People of course can purchase their own if they want.

https://marshallpowerlocke.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/obama-lie-of-the-year-obamacare.jpg

Where's your outrage for dems not passing single payer when they had the chance under Obama? They literally could have done this without a single republican vote able to stand in their way.

[Methais]

100% truth that Backrash will never acknowledge... he thinks libs/dems walk on water and do no harm. Meanwhile, every major city occupied by democrats gets further and further in debt, decay, crime, drugs and violence.

IT'S BECAUSE REPUBLICAN POLICIES ARE MAKING THEM POOR DESPITE BEING UNDER DEMOCRAT CONTROL FOR DECADES AND POOR = CRIME!!!!!!!!1111

[Neveragain]

Here's some more stats to call out the "Democrats will save us all"

Amazon political donations:


D R D R
2020 $2,514,130 $1,878,779 $617,510 75% 25%

2018 $13,626,791 $2,311,695 $1,042,235 69% 31%

2016 $1,803,089 $1,263,841 $431,734 75% 25%
.
.
.
.
No change in this trend in 22 years.

Why are the billionaires overwhelmingly donating to the party that spouts about income disparity?

https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/totals.php?id=D000023883&cycle=2018

[Back]

Here we go again. I have to constantly disrupt you simpletons little echo chamber with truth.

Saying I like chocolate does not mean I hate vanilla. Comprende? Adios, pendejos.

[Astray]

Adios, pendejos.

Don't appropriate other cultures like that, faggot.

[Jeril]

Why am I not surprised to hear you guys job shaming. Anyone working any job should be considered a hero for doing something productive with themselves. It pisses me off when people make fun of Walmart workers, or McDonalds, or the supermarket shelf stockers, or sign spinners, or any kind of job shaming. Its fucking juvenille bullshit. Grow up.

Seems like you just described the language in your post, good job.

[Ashlander]

Seems like you just described the language in your post, good job.

Well if he wasn't a retarded hypocrite he'd just be retarded. So at least he has that going for him.

[Methais]

Here we go again. I have to constantly disrupt you simpletons little echo chamber with truth.

It's only February and this is already the most ironic post of 2020.

https://media.giphy.com/media/l1KsJua7qIQnevGyk/giphy.gif

[Methais]

Seems like you just described the language in your post, good job.

Back loves when the words "fucking" and "juvenille" are next to each other.

[Seran]

Provide healthcare, housing, education to start. Money comes out of everyone's pockets so the rich can be rich. Skim a little off the top so everyone can have a little easier go at life.

Here's where your argument goes right off the rails; all of these programs are already in place. Medi-caid, TANF, SNAP Food Supplements, HUD Urban Revitalization, Section 8 Housing, Public Education, all of these programs have been benefitting our neediest population for decades . The problem isn't that there isn't enough, it's that the benefits are used for too long.

Cash and food assistance under the TANF and SNAP programs were put into place as a safety net, to make sure children had food and basic necessities. They were designed to supplement income due to underemployment or short-term unemployment. Families would be supported and the able bodied, thanks to Bill Clinton, were required to seek work, education or job training to become self sufficient again.

Socialists, such as Sanders and Warren, feel that public assistance is the duty of a society that shouldn't have preconditions or limits. They believe that forcing someone to work is the same as shaming them, when in reality it's the exact opposite.

Republicans feel the work provisions need to be strengthened, that undocumented folks need to be more strongly vetted on entry to guarantee self sufficiency and they're right. Where they're wrong is the program's shouldn't be defunded to offset staggering deficits created by irresponsible tax cuts.

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

Here's where your argument goes right off the rails; all of these programs are already in place. Medi-caid, TANF, SNAP Food Supplements, HUD Urban Revitalization, Section 8 Housing, Public Education, all of these programs have been benefitting our neediest population for decades . The problem isn't that there isn't enough, it's that the benefits are used for too long.

Cash and food assistance under the TANF and SNAP programs were put into place as a safety net, to make sure children had food and basic necessities. They were designed to supplement income due to underemployment or short-term unemployment. Families would be supported and the able bodied, thanks to Bill Clinton, were required to seek work, education or job training to become self sufficient again.

Socialists, such as Sanders and Warren, feel that public assistance is the duty of a society that shouldn't have preconditions or limits. They believe that forcing someone to work is the same as shaming them, when in reality it's the exact opposite.

Republicans feel the work provisions need to be strengthened, that undocumented folks need to be more strongly vetted on entry to guarantee self sufficiency and they're right. Where they're wrong is the program's shouldn't be defunded to offset staggering deficits created by irresponsible tax cuts.

Twice now I've agreed with MOST of what you state. My point of disagreement is the tax cuts being cause of the deficits. It's a LOT more than that (and I was against the tax cuts to begin with).

[Seran]

Twice now I've agreed with MOST of what you state. My point of disagreement is the tax cuts being cause of the deficits. It's a LOT more than that (and I was against the tax cuts to begin with).

There is a lot more to it, I agree, but an across the board slash of rates, particularly in the corporate sector weren't the answer.

Currently the IRS has a program where corporation's get large tax credits for hiring folks who have received public assistance, have criminal histories or were displaced. This credit could have been massively expanded to be larger and to extend to offering credits for worker training, continued education and relocation assistance. The benefit to the employer being a complete offset of the worker's salary, with a broader economic benefit of employing someone who'd likely continue to be on aid.

The IRS could have additionally extended the amnesty of repatriation of assets so long as the funds were invested in hiring, infrastructure development, or to a lesser degree asset acquisition and stock buybacks.

[Parkbandit]

Why am I not surprised to hear you guys job shaming. Anyone working any job should be considered a hero for doing something productive with themselves. It pisses me off when people make fun of Walmart workers, or McDonalds, or the supermarket shelf stockers, or sign spinners, or any kind of job shaming. Its fucking juvenille bullshit. Grow up.

I think it's more likely that people are not making fun of those jobs.. but of people like you who claimed to be something they are not.

Examples of this:

A restaurant owner
A restaurant manager
A gun purchaser

See also time4fun's endless topics where "she" proclaimed to be the authority on the subject due to being one, teaching others, being there, being related to or having a degree in it.

[Methais]

I think it's more likely that people are not making fun of those jobs.. but of people like you who claimed to be something they are not.

Examples of this:

A restaurant owner
A restaurant manager
A gun purchaser

See also time4fun's endless topics where "she" proclaimed to be the authority on the subject due to being one, teaching others, being there, being related to or having a degree in it.

This is correct.

There's nothing wrong with being a bus boy. Unless you first claimed to be the restaurant owner, then leaser, then manager. That just makes you either a liar or it makes you so incompetent that you managed to get demoted to bus boy from a business you owned and were literally everyone else's boss who worked there.

Which is it? Lies? Or unprecedented incompetence?

[Parkbandit]

Here we go again. I have to constantly disrupt you simpletons little echo chamber with truth.

Let us know when this "truth" starts.. because so far it's just you regurgitating stupidity you heard from Huffington Post.

In the meantime, Seran has given up his chance at the belt.. so there's no one else to defend it against.

Don't punch yourself silly.

[Seran]

Let us know when this "truth" starts.. because so far it's just you regurgitating stupidity you heard from Huffington Post.

In the meantime, Seran has given up his chance at the belt.. so there's no one else to defend it against.

Don't punch yourself silly.

Two birds with one stone with that backhanded compliment, I bow to your expert level sarcasm.

[Methais]

Two birds with one stone with that backhanded compliment, I bow to your expert level sarcasm.

For what it's worth, I'm pretty sure he meant it as a compliment due to your recent lack of retardedness.

[Parkbandit]

Two birds with one stone with that backhanded compliment, I bow to your expert level sarcasm.

There was literally zero sarcasm there.

At all.

And you ruined your streak of 2 non-retarded posts in a row.

Sad.