Dric902 Posted November 23, 2019 Share Posted November 23, 2019 I remember when Clinton was impeached. after the “agonizing deliberations” and everyone had their sound bites, it was worked out the the vote would be 50/50 so the Democrooks could run on the acquittal and the Republicans could run on the “not majority, basically a hung jury” then Orrin Hatch voted “not proven” you could almost hear the gasps and pearls being clutched. The vote was stopped and Mitch went to “talk” to Hatch. Moving faster than he had in decades, accused Hatch of breaking the deal. Clinton was acquitted with a 50/49/1 Hatch was persona non grata for a long time amongst the political class on the right, and a hero on the left. the entire affair is about as real as WWE Raw . 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
janice6 Posted November 23, 2019 Share Posted November 23, 2019 1 hour ago, Dric902 said: I remember when Clinton was impeached. after the “agonizing deliberations” and everyone had their sound bites, it was worked out the the vote would be 50/50 so the Democrooks could run on the acquittal and the Republicans could run on the “not majority, basically a hung jury” then Orrin Hatch voted “not proven” you could almost hear the gasps and pearls being clutched. The vote was stopped and Mitch went to “talk” to Hatch. Moving faster than he had in decades, accused Hatch of breaking the deal. Clinton was acquitted with a 50/49/1 Hatch was persona non grata for a long time amongst the political class on the right, and a hero on the left. the entire affair is about as real as WWE Raw . And, when the subject of Impeachment came up for Clinton, he wore it as a badge of honor! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Historian Posted November 23, 2019 Share Posted November 23, 2019 44 minutes ago, janice6 said: And, when the subject of Impeachment came up for Clinton, he wore it as a badge of honor! Honestly, he missed his chance. He could have simply said the truth. Cute intern: Hillary Clinton. Let's let America decide. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricordo Posted December 4, 2019 Author Share Posted December 4, 2019 Sorry to see that Obama was previously booked (swamped) today. He's a constitutional law scholar, former Nobel prize winner and People magazine sexiest man alive inductee. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
janice6 Posted December 4, 2019 Share Posted December 4, 2019 (edited) 4 hours ago, Ricordo said: Sorry to see that Obama was previously booked (swamped) today. He's a constitutional law scholar, former Nobel prize winner and People magazine sexiest man alive inductee. Ah yes! The promise of "vacuous things to come", that never came. The hope that bred dissention and conflict. The Idol of all who pit their fellow man against each other. Or, more simply, Carter's replacement at the bottom. Edited December 4, 2019 by janice6 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricordo Posted December 4, 2019 Author Share Posted December 4, 2019 My mistake. Obama was (is) there. And clearly showed how personal bias and prejudices can overrule the rule of law. Btw, loved the mousey look. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dric902 Posted December 5, 2019 Share Posted December 5, 2019 I just heard Pelosi, on camera, live say that this isn’t about politics coffee, right through the nose. Choking in laughter . 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
janice6 Posted December 5, 2019 Share Posted December 5, 2019 2 hours ago, Dric902 said: I just heard Pelosi, on camera, live say that this isn’t about politics coffee, right through the nose. Choking in laughter . You have to admire the result of multiple face lifts, that allow one to say foolish things and still keep a straight face. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricordo Posted December 5, 2019 Author Share Posted December 5, 2019 And suddenly.....a cast of secondary characters from "Gone with the Wind".... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricordo Posted December 5, 2019 Author Share Posted December 5, 2019 Ms. Pelosi announcing today, all-engines-full-steam-ahead... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Historian Posted December 5, 2019 Share Posted December 5, 2019 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricordo Posted December 6, 2019 Author Share Posted December 6, 2019 You guys have to take this matter much much more seriously. Our western civilization, and part of the eastern civilization is at stake, as Pope Pelosi has stated. And if you take into account both the northern civilization and a good-sized chunk of the southern part of Tierra del Fuego, pretty much our whole universe is at stake. So I would suggest that the Prez and youse guys take a breath, a shot or two of single malt whiskey, and think of the existential threat we are facing. How dare you! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricordo Posted December 6, 2019 Author Share Posted December 6, 2019 And if that wasn't enough, maybe this will bring you to your senses... 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricordo Posted December 8, 2019 Author Share Posted December 8, 2019 If a quid pro quo is ultimately proven, it will be the first time in history that the US Foreign Service has engaged in one. Never before in history...except for breakfast, lunch, dinner, and after-dinner mints. Never seen one, never thought I would. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
janice6 Posted December 8, 2019 Share Posted December 8, 2019 1 hour ago, Ricordo said: If a quid pro quo is ultimately proven, it will be the first time in history that the US Foreign Service has engaged in one. Never before in history...except for breakfast, lunch, dinner, and after-dinner mints. Never seen one, never thought I would. Isn't it odd how this doesn't apply to Biden and his bragging that he stopped an investigation by Ukraine. Something must have been different. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricordo Posted December 8, 2019 Author Share Posted December 8, 2019 50 minutes ago, janice6 said: Isn't it odd how this doesn't apply to Biden and his bragging that he stopped an investigation by Ukraine. Something must have been different. The difference lies in the fact that Biden didn't do it for personal gain. Oh...wait... One second.... Just a minute.... Never mind... 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricordo Posted December 10, 2019 Author Share Posted December 10, 2019 And here's a compilation on how well things turned out for Nadler today. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B7UmUX68KtE 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricordo Posted December 10, 2019 Author Share Posted December 10, 2019 Hearing Pope Nancy I today, I was reminded of a request that my father-in-law made a couple of days ago. He's 97 years old, dying of terminal cancer and shows a slight hint of dementia. He wanted his other daughter's dog, Popcorn, to come to his house with scissors to cut the ropes that the ladies that are caring for him had tied him up with. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricordo Posted December 13, 2019 Author Share Posted December 13, 2019 (edited) I loves me a Motion to Dismiss as much as any other fellow. I love it even more when I get a Notice of Dismissal from opposing brother counsel without filing a Motion to Dismiss. I have two of those---Grand Jury/Fed/ 10-20 Ks, one pre-Brady material, one post-Brady disclosure which did not include any exculpatory evidence. I also love it when arrogantly pedantic celebrities and oh-so-bigger-than-life figures tell me that I'm an idiot, that I lack discernment and my vote shouldn't count. Because...you know...they know so much better. All hail Queen Hillary... Edited December 13, 2019 by Ricordo 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dric902 Posted December 13, 2019 Share Posted December 13, 2019 But if they drag it out a little, they can get their sound bites for the campaign. if they just dismiss it...the fun is over . 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricordo Posted December 13, 2019 Author Share Posted December 13, 2019 23 minutes ago, Dric902 said: But if they drag it out a little, they can get their sound bites for the campaign. if they just dismiss it...the fun is over . That reminded me of the time that my kids (4-6 years old) were having the time of their lives and I barked in my melodious, almost angelic-like voice that they were only allowed to have a limited amount of fun. That any fun beyond that limit was strictly prohibited and would entail serious consequences. The look on their eyes made me feel embarrassed for a moment until I remembered that, at the time, I was only 84% Catholic. Thanks for the memories. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricordo Posted December 19, 2019 Author Share Posted December 19, 2019 (edited) Merry Impeachmas! "You looken sharpen todayen, mein herr." Edited December 19, 2019 by Ricordo 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricordo Posted December 20, 2019 Author Share Posted December 20, 2019 (edited) As proposed by someone from LA last night, if McConnell can't be impartial about an impeachment trial and must therefore recuse himself then the following, by their own admissions, must also recuse themselves: Sanders Warren Booker Harris Bennet Klobuchar Gillibrand Just a quid pro quo to resolve the impasse... Edited December 20, 2019 by Ricordo 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricordo Posted December 20, 2019 Author Share Posted December 20, 2019 Back to basics. A Motion to Dismiss is filed before answering a complaint or a petition. What it does is it "admits" the facts presented in the petition or the complaint as true and avers that even while taking them at face value as "facts", the petition or the complaint fails to meet the requirements of law and therefore must be dismissed. In other words, that the case presented is pure, unadulterated bullspit and not worth the time and effort to go to trial. It is a mini-trial contesting the validity of the allegations and the dismissal is the proper mechanism to get rid of the case. It is then the law of the case, a resolution on the merits of the allegations. If dismissed, and the petitioner or complainant files it again using the same words, allegations or inferences, the previous dismissal serves as the law of the case. In layman's terms, res judicata. Meaning, "we've already gone through this and it is the same bullspit". It is an adjudication on the merits of the case. The test in the peachy effort is: High crimes and misdemeanors. No High crimes and misdemeanors, no peachy. Or as a friend said, Confirmation CK109A. Love the darn things. Way better wrapped than a chimichanga. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dric902 Posted December 21, 2019 Share Posted December 21, 2019 Don’t mistake a Senate trial with a Judicial trial. They use the words and the trappings, Roberts as presiding judge. its not the same, it’s a completely political action. it’s always about party, negotiating the votes, posturing and political gain. . 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now