4 ms·

That's my whole point. Increasingly, people's idea of the rule of law is their subjective opinion of this person. Trump could have been impeached for the exact

That's my whole point. Increasingly, people's idea of the rule of law is their subjective opinion of this person. Trump could have been impeached for the exact same offense, and 99% of people opinions of what should happen next wouldn't change.

shadowgovt 7y ago
I believe if Trump were impeached for the same offense, with the same fact pattern, your assertion is not true. The offenses and fact patterns in question are quite different in these two cases.
- TallGuyShort 7y ago
  So you think the majority-Republican Senate might actually convict?
  - shadowgovt 7y ago
    Oh, absolutely not, because they don't think the way I do. The GOP has made it clear in this generation they care about power to rule and very little else; not their legacy, not the stability of the US government long-term, not quid pro quo or fair play. They seem to see their situation as one of existential threat, and they're operating as if the moment they lose control of Congress and the Presidency at the same time they will cease to exist as a political party.
    - TallGuyShort 7y ago
      Almost as if... it's basically a party-line vote. Which is exactly what I've been saying since my first comment in this thread. Why are we even discussing this? You keep proving my point by bringing it back to party lines. Trump was impeached on a near-perfect party line vote. Clinton was impeached, 2.5% away from being a perfect party line vote. It's virtually always a party line vote when it's a question of which president should have which power and get away with what.
      - shadowgovt 7y ago
        I don't think "virtually always parties" is a useful observation if it has little predictive power, and I don't think one can make predictions on a three-data-point event. But on the other topic (apples to oranges comparison): it's possible for both votes to be party-line regardless of the fact pattern if one party is corrupt and just always votes to maximize party power independent of fact patterns, and the fact pattern would induce a more objective juror to vote one way in one case and the other way in the other case. (The difference would be one would anticipate were a Democrat to do what Trump did, they'd be roundly impeached and convicted).
        TallGuyShort 7y ago
        "little predictive power". Okay. Within 2 votes, the senate's verdict will be in favor of Trump, 55-45. "1 of 2 parties is just corrupt" lol ok
        shadowgovt 7y ago
        Do you disagree that the scenario I described would explain the voting pattern or that one of the two parties is corrupt?
        TallGuyShort 7y ago
        I disagree that any vote on the matter of how much power the executive should have, or if any specific executive should be punished for an abuse of that power, would fall along anything other than party lines, with those in the same party as the current executive voting in his or her favor.
        shadowgovt 7y ago
        Ah, okay. So at least one of the two parties is corrupt.
        7y ago

shadowgovt 7y ago

I believe if Trump were impeached for the same offense, with the same fact pattern, your assertion is not true. The offenses and fact patterns in question are quite different in these two cases.

TallGuyShort 7y ago
So you think the majority-Republican Senate might actually convict?
- shadowgovt 7y ago
  Oh, absolutely not, because they don't think the way I do. The GOP has made it clear in this generation they care about power to rule and very little else; not their legacy, not the stability of the US government long-term, not quid pro quo or fair play. They seem to see their situation as one of existential threat, and they're operating as if the moment they lose control of Congress and the Presidency at the same time they will cease to exist as a political party.
  - TallGuyShort 7y ago
    Almost as if... it's basically a party-line vote. Which is exactly what I've been saying since my first comment in this thread. Why are we even discussing this? You keep proving my point by bringing it back to party lines. Trump was impeached on a near-perfect party line vote. Clinton was impeached, 2.5% away from being a perfect party line vote. It's virtually always a party line vote when it's a question of which president should have which power and get away with what.
    - shadowgovt 7y ago
      I don't think "virtually always parties" is a useful observation if it has little predictive power, and I don't think one can make predictions on a three-data-point event. But on the other topic (apples to oranges comparison): it's possible for both votes to be party-line regardless of the fact pattern if one party is corrupt and just always votes to maximize party power independent of fact patterns, and the fact pattern would induce a more objective juror to vote one way in one case and the other way in the other case. (The difference would be one would anticipate were a Democrat to do what Trump did, they'd be roundly impeached and convicted).
      - TallGuyShort 7y ago
        "little predictive power". Okay. Within 2 votes, the senate's verdict will be in favor of Trump, 55-45. "1 of 2 parties is just corrupt" lol ok
        shadowgovt 7y ago
        Do you disagree that the scenario I described would explain the voting pattern or that one of the two parties is corrupt?
        TallGuyShort 7y ago
        I disagree that any vote on the matter of how much power the executive should have, or if any specific executive should be punished for an abuse of that power, would fall along anything other than party lines, with those in the same party as the current executive voting in his or her favor.
        shadowgovt 7y ago
        Ah, okay. So at least one of the two parties is corrupt.
        7y ago