ZRod Posted February 17, 2021 Share Posted February 17, 2021 1 minute ago, Redux said: How about this, instead of trying to convince me of things that didn't happen, ask yourself why the trial suddenly ended. You can paint this story however you like, it's very detailed I'll give you that. Verbatim: Their evidence was assumption based. There was no smoking gun. And the Republicans that voted guilty did so to save face just like Mitch who doubled down after aquittal. Again, ask why the trial ended abruptly if it was such a ROCK SOLID CASE . Because they don't have to vote in good faith. I'm more than willing to look into what the witness shenanigans are about. I don't think you are willing to do the same for the overall body of work Trump cultivated, am I wrong? Again, I don't believe you understand how evidence, and specifically circumstancial evidence works. Please go watch the video and start at 21:47. It's about the 1st impeachment but it applies here as well. 1 Link to comment
Enhance Posted February 17, 2021 Share Posted February 17, 2021 Presidential impeachment has and likely always will be a caricature of itself. I don't think we'll ever see a president successfully convicted in an impeachment trial, unless they do something really wild. A POTUS would have to be caught on camera shooting an innocent person in the face or something outlandish like that, and even then, there'd probably be party loyalists hemming and hawing over whether or not the POTUS could be impeached for it. 1 Link to comment
RedDenver Posted February 17, 2021 Share Posted February 17, 2021 14 minutes ago, Redux said: Evidence including doctored tweets I hear! "Rock Solid Case" You hear or you have evidence for? 1 Link to comment
ZRod Posted February 17, 2021 Share Posted February 17, 2021 16 minutes ago, Redux said: Evidence including doctored tweets I hear! "Rock Solid Case" What tweets were doctored? 1 Link to comment
Redux Posted February 17, 2021 Share Posted February 17, 2021 32 minutes ago, ZRod said: Because they don't have to vote in good faith. I'm more than willing to look into what the witness shenanigans are about. I don't think you are willing to do the same for the overall body of work Trump cultivated, am I wrong? Again, I don't believe you understand how evidence, and specifically circumstancial evidence works. Please go watch the video and start at 21:47. It's about the 1st impeachment but it applies here as well. Because it wasn't a real trial. The body of work being the evidence, that's still NOT evidence. That's opinion based because this is still partisan politics. The impeachment was based off of Trump inciting the riot. He did not. His body of work included or not included, he did not. And if the evidence worked he would have been convicted. We can do this all day......again. Changes nothing. The evidence was assumption based and revealed nothing. 2 Link to comment
Redux Posted February 17, 2021 Share Posted February 17, 2021 30 minutes ago, RedDenver said: You hear or you have evidence for? I said I hear, did I not? I'm not scouring the web for after the matter implications on this ROCK SOLID CASE, but this was apparently the accusation in question. Supposedly the Republicans are crying foul about non Verified tweets having check marks added to them being used as evidence, this is what I found: https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/congress/impeachment-dems-admit-blue-check-twiitter-mistake-but-deny-manipulation-charge Link to comment
ZRod Posted February 17, 2021 Share Posted February 17, 2021 15 minutes ago, Redux said: Because it wasn't a real trial. The body of work being the evidence, that's still NOT evidence. That's opinion based because this is still partisan politics. The impeachment was based off of Trump inciting the riot. He did not. His body of work included or not included, he did not. And if the evidence worked he would have been convicted. We can do this all day......again. Changes nothing. The evidence was assumption based and revealed nothing. You're flat out denying reality dude. Start by reading the actual articles of impeachment. It's obvious you haven't. It's not long, and should take only 5 minutes of your life at most. Evidence doesn't "work". It's just evidence. It's simply used to draw conclusion from. Quote LAW information given personally, drawn from a document, or in the form of material objects, tending or used to establish facts in a legal investigation or admissible as testimony in court. The evidence was tweets, video, transcripts, and audio clips. How is that assumption based? 4 Link to comment
Redux Posted February 17, 2021 Share Posted February 17, 2021 16 minutes ago, ZRod said: You're flat out denying reality dude. Start by reading the actual articles of impeachment. It's obvious you haven't. It's not long, and should take only 5 minutes of your life at most. Evidence doesn't "work". It's just evidence. It's simply used to draw conclusion from. The evidence was tweets, video, transcripts, and audio clips. How is that assumption based? The accusation was that he incited the violence on the Capitol. The evidence was weak and based on the assumption that his words were not his words. 1 Link to comment
ZRod Posted February 17, 2021 Share Posted February 17, 2021 19 minutes ago, Redux said: The accusation was that he incited the violence on the Capitol. The evidence was weak and based on the assumption that his words were not his words. Read it. 2 Link to comment
Redux Posted February 17, 2021 Share Posted February 17, 2021 19 minutes ago, ZRod said: Read it. Being snide doesn't change the levity or the outcome. Sorry it didn't pan out as you and many others hoped. Me, I don't really care. I'd just like them to actually do something now that it's over since they have control of the entire government. 1 Link to comment
knapplc Posted February 17, 2021 Share Posted February 17, 2021 18 minutes ago, Redux said: Me, I don't really care. 2 Link to comment
ZRod Posted February 17, 2021 Share Posted February 17, 2021 23 minutes ago, Redux said: Being snide doesn't change the levity or the outcome. Sorry it didn't pan out as you and many others hoped. Me, I don't really care. I'd just like them to actually do something now that it's over since they have control of the entire government. I'm not being snide. Stop taking offense at me asking you to inform yourself. You should really read the text your own government wrote. Be an informed citizen. I promise it will hardly take any of your time. 3 Link to comment
Archy1221 Posted February 17, 2021 Share Posted February 17, 2021 Just now, ZRod said: I'm not being snide. Stop taking offense at me asking you to inform yourself. You should really read the text your own government wrote. Be an informed citizen. I promise it will hardly take any of your time. Either way, he is correct in that the Article was an incorrect charge and this will be born out even more so over time by Trump not being convicted in an actual court of law either for said charge. 1 Link to comment
Redux Posted February 17, 2021 Share Posted February 17, 2021 4 minutes ago, knapplc said: I promise I care a lot less than you do Link to comment
ZRod Posted February 17, 2021 Share Posted February 17, 2021 2 minutes ago, Archy1221 said: Either way, he is correct in that the Article was an incorrect charge and this will be born out even more so over time by Trump not being convicted in an actual court of law either for said charge. What is the correct charge? Link to comment
Recommended Posts