Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Very

6 (50%)

Some

4 (33.3%)

Not sure

0 (0%)

Not really

1 (8.3%)

Not in the slightest

1 (8.3%)

Total Members Voted: 11

Voting closed: February 15, 2022, 10:51:36 AM

[kidcarter8]

The Warren Hastings (British India ruler) impeachment trial was ongoing during the drafting of the Constitution.  The framers mentioned it during their deliberations.  He was out of office when his impeachment began.  So they were aware of the issue of former officials being impeached -- the Hastings impeachment was a big deal in Britain in 1787-79, until it dragged on for 5 more years.  Some US states specifically mentioned former officials; Delaware restricted impeachment to only former officials.  Etc.  It seems to be why the Constitution talks about civil officials in one section regarding impeachment but then later switches to persons.  That is, to include ex-officials.  I thought the House managers did a good job on that. 

The Hastings case from the time of drafting the Constitution + Belknap from the Civil War era make it pretty clear ex-officials are impeachable.  Plus the Senate voted that ex-officials are impeachable.  The Senate shall try "all impeachments" (which would include ex-officials).  Overall a very strong case.

None of this negates the fact that THEY ARE JUST BEING PRICKS BY IMPEACHING A SECOND TIME.

Dems had their win - then another - and could have run away with them.

But now have given the former president a victory - and the nation more headaches.

[bankshot1]

I don't pretend that I'm an expert in these matters (ie Texas extreme cold-grid problem) nor in a position to provide solutions, but it seems this is another matter where the orderly transition of power is at the core and has to be addressed.

I feel terrible for the suffering of those in the impacted areas, but the sooner we can transition to cleaner energy sources it seems the better off the planet will be.   

[bodiddley]

You don't think Trump was responsible for the insurrection/riot at the Capitol?

Mitch McConnell does. 
Probably 17 or more GOP senators as well...

[bankshot1]

The Warren Hastings (British India ruler) impeachment trial was ongoing during the drafting of the Constitution.  The framers mentioned it during their deliberations.  He was out of office when his impeachment began.  So they were aware of the issue of former officials being impeached -- the Hastings impeachment was a big deal in Britain in 1787-79, until it dragged on for 5 more years.  Some US states specifically mentioned former officials; Delaware restricted impeachment to only former officials.  Etc.  It seems to be why the Constitution talks about civil officials in one section regarding impeachment but then later switches to persons.  That is, to include ex-officials.  I thought the House managers did a good job on that. 

The Hastings case from the time of drafting the Constitution + Belknap from the Civil War era make it pretty clear ex-officials are impeachable.  Plus the Senate voted that ex-officials are impeachable.  The Senate shall try "all impeachments" (which would include ex-officials).  Overall a very strong case.

None of this negates the fact that THEY ARE JUST BEING PRICKS BY IMPEACHING A SECOND TIME.

Dems had their win - then another - and could have run away with them.

But now have given the former president a victory - and the nation more headaches.

Trump, despite overwhelming evidence and a thorough and well-prepared prosecution, was acquitted as expected by jury nullification.

Most Americans understand Trump's guilt, and by a similiar margins as the Senate vote.

Trump won just like OJ won.

[bodiddley]

And there should be plenty of green energy jobs, such as manufacturing solar panels and turbines, installation, computer programming, maintenance, etc.

Wind and solar are obviously the energy and energy industries of the future.
They are already as cheap as natural gas/coal.
While the reduced pollution and reduction in climate change is a huge benefit.
Also there will be a lot less money flowing to corrupt oil dictatorships.

It's like the phase-out of gasoline powered vehicles.
It can either happen quickly or slowly, but it's going to happen.
The sooner the better (as practicable) for the health of humans and the planet.
There'll be a lot of misinformation as a dying industry tries to squeeze out as much profit as they can before the transition.

Biden Admin should target removing the subsidies that the oil and gas industry enjoys.  I'd like to find a list of those to see what can be done.

[Yankguy1]

The Warren Hastings (British India ruler) impeachment trial was ongoing during the drafting of the Constitution.  The framers mentioned it during their deliberations.  He was out of office when his impeachment began.  So they were aware of the issue of former officials being impeached -- the Hastings impeachment was a big deal in Britain in 1787-79, until it dragged on for 5 more years.  Some US states specifically mentioned former officials; Delaware restricted impeachment to only former officials.  Etc.  It seems to be why the Constitution talks about civil officials in one section regarding impeachment but then later switches to persons.  That is, to include ex-officials.  I thought the House managers did a good job on that. 

The Hastings case from the time of drafting the Constitution + Belknap from the Civil War era make it pretty clear ex-officials are impeachable.  Plus the Senate voted that ex-officials are impeachable.  The Senate shall try "all impeachments" (which would include ex-officials).  Overall a very strong case.

None of this negates the fact that THEY ARE JUST BEING PRICKS BY IMPEACHING A SECOND TIME.

Dems had their win - then another - and could have run away with them.

But now have given the former president a victory - and the nation more headaches.

Trump, despite overwhelming evidence and a thorough and well-prepared prosecution, was acquitted as expected by jury nullification.

Most Americans understand Trump's guilt, and by a similiar margins as the Senate vote.

Trump won just like OJ won.

I wonder if Kid thinks that writing in all caps makes him look smarter.

[bankshot1]

The Warren Hastings (British India ruler) impeachment trial was ongoing during the drafting of the Constitution.  The framers mentioned it during their deliberations.  He was out of office when his impeachment began.  So they were aware of the issue of former officials being impeached -- the Hastings impeachment was a big deal in Britain in 1787-79, until it dragged on for 5 more years.  Some US states specifically mentioned former officials; Delaware restricted impeachment to only former officials.  Etc.  It seems to be why the Constitution talks about civil officials in one section regarding impeachment but then later switches to persons.  That is, to include ex-officials.  I thought the House managers did a good job on that. 

The Hastings case from the time of drafting the Constitution + Belknap from the Civil War era make it pretty clear ex-officials are impeachable.  Plus the Senate voted that ex-officials are impeachable.  The Senate shall try "all impeachments" (which would include ex-officials).  Overall a very strong case.

None of this negates the fact that THEY ARE JUST BEING PRICKS BY IMPEACHING A SECOND TIME.

Dems had their win - then another - and could have run away with them.

But now have given the former president a victory - and the nation more headaches.

Trump, despite overwhelming evidence and a thorough and well-prepared prosecution, was acquitted as expected by jury nullification.

Most Americans understand Trump's guilt, and by a similiar margins as the Senate vote.

Trump won just like OJ won.

I wonder if Kid thinks that writing in all caps makes him look smarter.

For me, I know font size and a vibrant color is usually a sufficient distraction from a brilliantly articulated argument, and may change my opinion.

perhaps if kid used crimson, royal blue, emerald, or burnt sienna in addition to caps he would be more persusive.

[Kam]

That green new deal doesn’t look so good in Texas right now.

Congratulations! That is by far the stupidest thing posted today. And you were going up against the antipodal idiot and kiid, so it is quite an accomplishment.

Actually it was the most observant post of the day.

You understand it's a grid problem,  not a green energy problem,  right?   Coal plants were offline,  too.   In fact the tech for solar is the kind of tech that reduces grid woes.

Idiot.

Equipment failure turned out to be a big part of the problem.

https://www.wfaa.com/article/news/local/texas/dallas-texas-electrical-power-outage-ercot-failures/287-50797307-0afe-43eb-8175-b78e7e4fc13a

Sounds like a people problem.  Since this kind of weather only happens once a decade folks decided that winterizing equipment was too much of a hassle.

[facilitatorn]

http://m.dailykos.com/stories/2021/2/16/2016337/-Messing-with-Texas-The-Lone-Star-state-s-power-grid-is-working-exactly-as-designed

Profits over people have given Texas its massive failure as coal, oil, and gas infrastructure comes up short.

[Hairy Lime]

The Warren Hastings (British India ruler) impeachment trial was ongoing during the drafting of the Constitution.  The framers mentioned it during their deliberations.  He was out of office when his impeachment began.  So they were aware of the issue of former officials being impeached -- the Hastings impeachment was a big deal in Britain in 1787-79, until it dragged on for 5 more years.  Some US states specifically mentioned former officials; Delaware restricted impeachment to only former officials.  Etc.  It seems to be why the Constitution talks about civil officials in one section regarding impeachment but then later switches to persons.  That is, to include ex-officials.  I thought the House managers did a good job on that. 

The Hastings case from the time of drafting the Constitution + Belknap from the Civil War era make it pretty clear ex-officials are impeachable.  Plus the Senate voted that ex-officials are impeachable.  The Senate shall try "all impeachments" (which would include ex-officials).  Overall a very strong case.

None of this negates the fact that THEY ARE JUST BEING PRICKS BY IMPEACHING A SECOND TIME.

Dems had their win - then another - and could have run away with them.

But now have given the former president a victory - and the nation more headaches.

You are the one being a prick. Trump's conduct from November 3 on has been focused on retaining the presidency by any means, starting with legal to increasingly unwarranted law suits to illegally pressuring government officials to continuously lying to his followers about the election to summoning them to Washington and shooting them like an arrow at congress during the certification vote. All of it designed to reverse the result of an election he lost. That is what got him impeached. Not inflammatory rhetoric, the attempt to overthrow the elected government. He deserved impeachment. The mewling whataboutism of his worshippers like you aside. It was important to combat his actions so they never happen again. It is only a pity that only 7 Republicans had the moral courage to see that.

[josh]

The Warren Hastings (British India ruler) impeachment trial was ongoing during the drafting of the Constitution.  The framers mentioned it during their deliberations.  He was out of office when his impeachment began.  So they were aware of the issue of former officials being impeached -- the Hastings impeachment was a big deal in Britain in 1787-79, until it dragged on for 5 more years.  Some US states specifically mentioned former officials; Delaware restricted impeachment to only former officials.  Etc.  It seems to be why the Constitution talks about civil officials in one section regarding impeachment but then later switches to persons.  That is, to include ex-officials.  I thought the House managers did a good job on that. 

The Hastings case from the time of drafting the Constitution + Belknap from the Civil War era make it pretty clear ex-officials are impeachable.  Plus the Senate voted that ex-officials are impeachable.  The Senate shall try "all impeachments" (which would include ex-officials).  Overall a very strong case.

None of this negates the fact that THEY ARE JUST BEING PRICKS BY IMPEACHING A SECOND TIME.

Dems had their win - then another - and could have run away with them.

But now have given the former president a victory - and the nation more headaches.

(a) You are a far bigger prick for thinking this was about being a prick. He blatantly stirred the pot. Just as Mitch, dipshit. If his only defense was the bogus claim about the Constitutional limitation, that is no defense at all - but an acknowledgment of his having acted criminally.

(b) No, the former president didn't get a headache and the gutlessness of the GOP did, in fact, give the nation more headaches - it has shown how worthless the impeachment clause is for the presidency.

(c) Watch the case against Trump brought by Rep. Bennie Thompson (D - MS), in his private capacity. I imagine you will find that establishes Trump's culpability in a way no sham jury members from the GOP would.

[Kam]

(c) Watch the case against Trump brought by Rep. Bennie Thompson (D - MS), in his private capacity. I imagine you will find that establishes Trump's culpability in a way no sham jury members from the GOP would.

[REDSTATEWARD]

In Texas the official energy organization curiously ( for now) called Electric Reliability Council says electric reliability is pretty bad.

At this time, [the Electric Reliability Council of Texas] is unable to predict when grid conditions will stabilize,” Oncor, a utility that serves more than 10 million customers, tweeted Tuesday morning. “All customers are urged to be prepared for continued extended outages

[kidcarter8]

Two Tennessee lawmakers have proposed a bill that would permit a biological father to petition a court to halt a woman who is pregnant with his unborn child from getting an abortion, The Hill reported on Tuesday.

The bill, which was introduced by state Sen. Mark Pody and state Rep. Jerry Sexton, states that once the injunction is issued, the court must hold a hearing with both parties within 14 days. If a woman violates the injunction and obtains an abortion, "the court may hold the respondent in civil or criminal contempt and punish the respondent in accordance with the law."`

[LarryBnDC]

That green new deal doesn’t look so good in Texas right now.

Conservatives love to royally fuck up and then blame shit that hasn't yet happened.

Teas is getting BONED because Republicans insisted on having an independent power grid to avoid conforming with federal regulations.

So other states can't divert poower to help the LONE STAR state.