Triple Espresso of Coffee Talk

[forty_three]

I stopped answering numbers not in my phone book. I picked up one pollster during the election last fall by mistake, told them I was voting for the black face guy and hung up.

By comparison, my father in law answers every single call.

 

[Comeds]

I hate when I make a funny comment and am hoping for a response from Comeds only to have to wait forever because he can't properly use a tablet.


Hey, if you need help with tablets, why don't you call Moses! Get it, because he w...guys?...GUYS?!?

I answer, it just may be in a different thread...

 

[Bloody Brian Burke]

It has nothing really to do with morality.

If those house members had the facts of Trump's misdeeds re. Ukraine come across their desk and chose not to do anything, they would be in dereliction of their duties. Simply doing your job is not a measure of morality it's a measure of responsibility.

There are like 4000 ways I would go after the average politician for dereliction if duty before I get to “didn’t try to get the president out of office because he tried to dig up dirt on an opponent”.

It was dumb for Republicans to try to get lame duck Clinton out of the WH on perjury charges related to a blow job and if Al Gore wasn’t galaxy braining back in 2000 he would’ve campaigned with Bubba more and probably would’ve been President. His popularity soared post-impeachment. There’s a lot of parallels between then and now. People who were around back then (including both Democratic leaders in Congress) remember that and did everything they could to avoid going down this route until enough people in their party yelled loudly enough to drown them out and left them no choice. They knew how this was gonna go.

 

[dash]

By the way, did anybody see Justice Brett Kavanaugh running down the aisle last night?!? Apparently, he misheard and thought they were chanting "Four More Beers"

 

[Bloody Brian Burke]

And if we’re honestly doing the whole “it’s their duty to uphold the constitution and hold impeachment hearings when we think they don’t” Congress might as well be a permanent theatre of impeachment because not one president hasn’t done something we could call unconstitutional.

 

[elocomotive]

And if we’re honestly doing the whole “it’s their duty to uphold the constitution and hold impeachment hearings when we think they don’t” Congress might as well be a permanent theatre of impeachment because not one president hasn’t done something we could call unconstitutional.

There's a difference between unconstitutional and high crimes and misdemeanors.

Being uncertain the powers of your office and knowingly committing a criminal act are two different things. I don't believe either Bush or Obama did anything that rises to the latter while in office.

 

[KennyBanyeah]

There are like 4000 ways I would go after the average politician for dereliction if duty before I get to “didn’t try to get the president out of office because he tried to dig up dirt on an opponent”.

It was dumb for Republicans to try to get lame duck Clinton out of the WH on perjury charges related to a blow job and if Al Gore wasn’t galaxy braining back in 2000 he would’ve campaigned with Bubba more and probably would’ve been President. His popularity soared post-impeachment. There’s a lot of parallels between then and now. People who were around back then (including both Democratic leaders in Congress) remember that and did everything they could to avoid going down this route until enough people in their party yelled loudly enough to drown them out and left them no choice. They knew how this was gonna go.

But the whistle blower info was going public. Not only was it their duty to pursue that avenue of removing a corrupt President, but they would have looked weak, irresponsible, lazy and complicit had they done nothing.

Do you really advocate that they should have just ignored this information despite it being in the public domain? How ineffectual would that have looked?

If dumbasses want to think that this was a hoax, that's up to them. The evidence strongly supports the claim that the President attempted to coerce a foreign government to influence the democratic process.

If you start doing things solely for votes you are on a slippery slope to irrelevance. You do your job and control what you can.

 

[Comeds]

Hey, Ive got a fever, vision is hazy
Coronavirus, mark me maybe
Can't catch my breath, coughing crazy
Coronavirus, mark me maybe
Had diarrhea, in my Mercedes
Coronavirus, mark me maybe
Awful headache, body achey
Coronavirus, mark me maybe

 

[dash]

Hey, Ive got a fever, vision is hazy
Coronavirus, mark me maybe
Can't catch my breath, coughing crazy
Coronavirus, mark me maybe
Had diarrhea, in my Mercedes
Coronavirus, mark me maybe
Awful headache, body achey
Coronavirus, mark me maybe

They say that laughter is the best medicine.

 

[elocomotive]

They say that laughter is the best medicine.

Yeah, but the doctor who prescribed that died.

 

[dash]

Yeah, but the doctor who prescribed that died.

I recently visited my doctor and he told me that I had six months to live. I told him I couldn't pay his bill and he gave me another six months.

 

[Bloody Brian Burke]

But the whistle blower info was going public. Not only was it their duty to pursue that avenue of removing a corrupt President, but they would have looked weak, irresponsible, lazy and complicit had they done nothing.

When hasn’t congress looked like everything you just described? Their approval rating is lower than Max Bernier’s and has been since forever.

Do you really advocate that they should have just ignored this information despite it being in the public domain? How ineffectual would that have looked?

If dumbasses want to think that this was a hoax, that's up to them. The evidence strongly supports the claim that the President attempted to coerce a foreign government to influence the democratic process.

If you start doing things solely for votes you are on a slippery slope to irrelevance. You do your job and control what you can.

I, personally, think they should do their jobs and their jobs absolutely entail everything you just mentioned and that you and others have been saying. I, personally, am not in disagreement.

But I’m not a politician, and I’m not up for election every two years and I am not tasked with the job of contributing to unseating an incumbent president. If those were my jobs, yeah, I would’ve just let it slide and campaigned on it. It was always the smarter political move and getting rid of Trump is supposed to be ALL that matters to these people at this point. Impeachment was never going to accomplish that.

 

[KennyBanyeah]

When hasn’t congress looked like everything you just described? Their approval rating is lower than Max Bernier’s and has been since forever.

No offense but hhis is an absolutely terrible argument; they've been bad at their job in the past so why try to make any kind of improvement in performance.

It sums up a lot of the neo-conservative movement of today but it's a shit rationale as to why you should use all your options to expose the crimes of the top public servant in your country.

 

[Darkstone42]

There are like 4000 ways I would go after the average politician for dereliction if duty before I get to “didn’t try to get the president out of office because he tried to dig up dirt on an opponent”.

It was dumb for Republicans to try to get lame duck Clinton out of the WH on perjury charges related to a blow job and if Al Gore wasn’t galaxy braining back in 2000 he would’ve campaigned with Bubba more and probably would’ve been President. His popularity soared post-impeachment. There’s a lot of parallels between then and now. People who were around back then (including both Democratic leaders in Congress) remember that and did everything they could to avoid going down this route until enough people in their party yelled loudly enough to drown them out and left them no choice. They knew how this was gonna go.

There is an enormous difference between Clinton's scandal and Trump undermining the decisions of Congress, not to advance a sincerely-held belief in some national interest, but for his own personal gains. One of those impeachments comes across as a petty hit. The other as an upholding of the Constitutional division of powers and the integrity of our elections.

And how many elections are they going to win if they signal to their opponents, "Hey, you know what? Go ahead and cheat, we don't care. We're more scared of political backlash than your efforts to undermine the process by which we're elected in your favor."

And if we’re honestly doing the whole “it’s their duty to uphold the constitution and hold impeachment hearings when we think they don’t” Congress might as well be a permanent theatre of impeachment because not one president hasn’t done something we could call unconstitutional.

Honest to goodness, I wouldn't mind see more impeachment hearings until presidents stop abusing military power and committing war crimes, but at least Bush and Obama weren't transparently acting in exclusively their own personal interests. That's an important distinction.

 

[KennyBanyeah]

No offense but hhis is an absolutely terrible argument; they've been bad at their job in the past so why try to make any kind of improvement in performance.

It sums up a lot of the neo-conservative movement of today but it's a shit rationale as to why you shouldn't use all your options to expose the crimes of the top public servant in your country.

Should read "shouldn't use all your options" .

 

[elocomotive]

Kudos, Mitt Romney. Anybody else?

 

[elocomotive]

Geee... I wonder what Trump liked about this Tweet... from back in November.

We always thought he was Tweeting while on the toilet taking a dump. But he might be up to other activities...

 

[KennyBanyeah]

Kudos, Mitt Romney. Anybody else?

Gary "the Glove" Payton >> Mitt Ronmey >>>>>>>>>>>>> Pussyhands Trump

 

[forty_three]

Pretty... pretty... pretty good.

 

[Bloody Brian Burke]

There is an enormous difference between Clinton's scandal and Trump undermining the decisions of Congress, not to advance a sincerely-held belief in some national interest, but for his own personal gains. One of those impeachments comes across as a petty hit. The other as an upholding of the Constitutional division of powers and the integrity of our elections.

And how many elections are they going to win if they signal to their opponents, "Hey, you know what? Go ahead and cheat, we don't care. We're more scared of political backlash than your efforts to undermine the process by which we're elected in your favor."



Honest to goodness, I wouldn't mind see more impeachment hearings until presidents stop abusing military power and committing war crimes, but at least Bush and Obama weren't transparently acting in exclusively their own personal interests. That's an important distinction.

Man, this is a weird argument.

First off, I’m being excoriated for grading crimes worthy of impeachment and then reading why Clinton’s impeachment crime was “a petty hit” while the other is the work of Satan.

Then I’m being told that Obama’s and Bush’s possible war crimes that resulted in thousands of dead civilians were bad but at least they didn’t personally gain from them (questionable for Bush but...). If we’re living in a world where scores of innocent deaths are somehow comparable to trying to score dirt on Hunter Biden we’ve all lost it.