Comments by "Triple 9" (@Betta66) on "Nancy Pelosi Admits Defeat: Impeachment to be Sent to Die in the Senate" video.

  1. Removed from office for...doing what was going to happen eventually anyway?
    3
  2. If she had held the articles indefinitely, you would've complained.
    3
  3.  @zanitzeuken  Every single impeachment trial ever has had witnesses. Senate Republicans should be viewing this as an opportunity to summon Joe and Hunter Biden, and they're not even going to get that right.
    2
  4.  @barrysutton4589  Failing to learn from the mistakes of 2016, are you?
    2
  5.  @zanitzeuken  What authority do you think she had that would've allowed her to do anything about it? Even if she did have that authority, you would've found some reason to complain.
    2
  6.  @zanitzeuken  We got impeachment, but as long as you're claiming people should be upset about the use of authority, how about this? I'll be upset by Pelosi withholding the articles when you're upset that McConnell already stated on the record that he had already decided the outcome of the trial before it started, which is NOT HOW TRIALS WORK. But we both know that'll never happen.
    2
  7.  @1940limited  Someone has very strange ideas about what "losing" is.
    2
  8.  @tylerskiss  Where in the Constitution does it say that what Pelosi is doing is wrong? Seriously, show me. I'll wait. Actually, don't bother. It's not in there and you're just pulling excuses out of your ass.
    1
  9.  @zanitzeuken  I was referring to the act of sending articles of impeachment to the Senate, genius.
    1
  10.  @zanitzeuken  The amendment that says "Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted"? How does that translate to "Pelosi is violating her oath of office"?
    1
  11.  @Carandini  That's not quid pro quo. She's not saying "I'll give you the articles of impeachment if you vote to remove him." She's saying "I'll give you the articles if you stop being a prick and allow witnesses like there've been in every single impeachment trial ever."
    1
  12.  @zanitzeuken  Thank you for the correction. "In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State" If the trial is in the Senate, then the senators serve as jurors, yes? Even if the House's charges are completely unfounded, there should still be a fair trial to prove that definitively. Think about it: if the Democrats get their request for a fair trial and they still lose, that would make their defeat even more humiliating, wouldn't it? I'm giving Republicans their best ideas and I'm a goddamn Democrat.
    1
  13.  @zanitzeuken  What does the Constitution define as "unnecessary" regarding "unnecessary delays"?
    1
  14.  @zanitzeuken  Bull. Fucking. Shit. Every single impeachment trial in Senate history has had witnesses. Witnesses don't suddenly stop mattering just because you say they do. If evidence matters more, you should be fuming that McConnell is refusing to allow witnesses because summoning Joe and Hunter Biden would be a perfect opportunity for Republicans to gather evidence in Trump's defense. Seriously, I should not be the one giving you your best ideas. Multiple Ukrainian officials have stated that neither Joe nor Hunter Biden did anything wrong, Trump's idea of a "perfect phone call" transcript is a document that says "not a verbatim transcript" on the first page so evidence of his innocence is shaky at best, and here you are making excuses for someone you already decided you're going to defend no matter what.
    1
  15.  Dañe Highfield  I've been called worse things by people who actually matter.
    1
  16.  Chris A. Medina  This would be a hilarious joke comment if I didn't think you were 100% serious about Trump draining the swamp.
    1
  17.  Chris A. Medina  Trump's Task Force is doing no such thing. Expecting Trump to drain the swamp is like needing a babysitter and hiring Fat Bastard.
    1
  18.  @reversalmushroom  Pfft, like she's the worst example. "Thank you and God bless the United Shates."
    1
  19.  Randolph Carter  Project much?
    1
  20.  @craigparker4108  No one here has been able to adequately explain to me where in the Constitution it says that what the House did was wrong. Show me who these aficionados are and what they said.
    1
  21.  @craigparker4108  Since when do you suddenly start listening to Democrats?
    1
  22. Urbicide Failing to learn from the media’s mistakes, are you?
    1
  23. You’re full of shit.
    1
  24.  @lolerie  Good comeback, Dad /s
    1
  25.  @lolerie  Well, when you put it that way, that is pretty weird.
    1
  26.  @violenceislife1987  Yes, you are.
    1
  27. The shutdown he lost?
    1
  28.  @zanitzeuken  450 miles were promised by the end of this year. After three years, we only have 100, and most of that is just replacements for existing barriers. You'll die of old age before you see your precious border wall, and even when it's built, we already know it can be easily scaled.
    1
  29.  @violenceislife1987  Baseless accusations are only okay when you make them, huh? You have no evidence I'm being paid because I'm not.
    1
  30.  @zanitzeuken  I thought Trump branded himself a master negotiator. You're telling me such an individual couldn't have talked his way into getting a wall? Or are you implicitly admitting he's actually a terrible negotiator? Try again.
    1
  31.  @violenceislife1987  I'm not complaining. I'm pointing out that Trump isn't meeting the goal he himself set.
    1
  32.  @zanitzeuken  So you're flat out admitting Trump isn't a great negotiator?
    1
  33.  @zanitzeuken  The mistake I'm referring to is the mistake of misplaced arrogance.
    1
  34.  @violenceislife1987  "in b4 @2windswords scREEches that Trump isn't his President " Too bad because you'll never see me say that.
    1
  35.  @zanitzeuken  I have a better understanding of how it works than Trump does. I know, for instance, that the shutdown was a failure on his part. He wanted border wall funding. What did he get out of the shutdown? Several billion dollars in taxpayer money gone forever and no border wall funding.
    1
  36.  @joshuaroe1402  The number of illegal border crossings had been going down since the Bush administration. Obama deported more undocumented immigrants than Trump did. Try again.
    1
  37.  @grumpusmaximus9446  He did? I looked up "Obama declared southern border secure 2011" and all I found was him saying the border fence was "basically complete." So what you're saying is that even with barriers, the border isn't fully secure? And I'm expected to think a wall would somehow be different? A wall we already know can be easily scaled? A wall that we don't know the cost of because it keeps changing? Keep telling yourself that, idiot.
    1
  38.  @zanitzeuken  I think you're intentionally missing the point. A great negotiator would never consider that an obstacle. He himself was once a Democrat, you know. If he knew the party well, he'd use that to his advantage. Heck, in his first two years, his own party controlled every branch of government. And he STILL made next to no progress on the wall despite the executive order he signed on day 5 saying there would be one.
    1
  39.  @ahzekahriman5840  $3 billion permanently lost according to the CBO. Three races in November won by Democrats, two of which were in deep red states. Try again, prick.
    1
  40.  @zanitzeuken  A great negotiator wouldn't consider that an obstacle. A great negotiator would just find some way to work around that. He didn't because none of this money is coming from Mexico like he promised. We're the ones paying for it and you're making excuses.
    1
  41.  @grumpusmaximus9446  1. It's not that I believe the walls can be easily scaled. I know that for a fact: https://www.desertsun.com/story/news/politics/immigration/2019/12/05/video-shows-newly-built-border-fence-being-scaled-mexicali/2610599001/ So it being a deterrent is bullshit. 2. I'm not mad by the idea of having border security. I'm mad that Trump seems to think a border wall is the only solution and that anyone who disagrees hates America, even though the construction of a border wall involves multiple factors that he seems more than happy to overlook despite it being one of his key campaign promises. It's not "more cost-effective" just because you say it is. He gives a different price tag every single time, but Mexico is never going to be the one paying for any of it - we are. I'd love to hear you try to explain how that's not actually what he meant when he said repeatedly "We're going to build a wall and make Mexico pay for it." 3. Your medical degree from Trump University was a scam just like everything else Trump does. Get a real degree (like I did) and shut up about TDS.
    1
  42.  @grumpusmaximus9446  Amazing. Every word of what you just said is wrong. 1. If Trump's vision of the wall is such an effective deterrent, then again, why is it so easy to scale? If it's so cost effective, why does the price tag keep changing every time he's asked? 2. I got that idea from Trump himself when he said the wall was the only solution to the "growing humanitarian crisis" at the border. I believe it was an Oval Office address he gave last January. 3. Apprehensions of illegal border crossings had been decreasing since the Bush administration, dumbass. Now you're just pulling excuses out of your ass. Trump didn't say "Mexico will help us through added cooperation." He said "We will build a wall and make Mexico pay for it," you idiot. 4. Wrong! The majority of undocumented immigrants show up to court hearings, according to the Justice Department. Try again.
    1
  43.  @grumpusmaximus9446  I'm reading your comment waiting for the facts to show up and I have a feeling I'm going to wait a very long time. If Trump wins re-election, it will not be a landslide based on the simple FACT that he won 2016 on what amounted to a technicality. Democrats won three elections in November, two of which were in deep red states. You're a liar and an idiot who defends a con man and you will never have the facts. Go fuck yourself.
    1
  44.  @depravedbeast1735  HAHAHAHAHA, good one
    1
  45. @Charles Yuditsky I already have one, prick.
    1
  46.  @deadsmoke198  Barely anyone reads newspapers anymore, which is why that isn't my job, asshole.
    1
  47.  @MC-wh3xm  You're a damn terrible listener, eh? Did you not hear a word of what I said? Literally no one in the Democratic field is calling for absolutely no border security whatsoever.
    1
  48.  @edwardsaucedo9223  "Activist judge" is just your way of saying "liberal judge." Don't bullshit me.
    1
  49.  @edwardsaucedo9223  "Hey, I know you're a cyclist, so I ordered you a motorcycle." "B-but I never took motorcycle lessons and those things are way more expensive than a regular bike." "What are you, some kind of America-hating commie?" ^ That's what you sound like.
    1
  50.  @SaneMillennial  Only because you forgot the part where the shutdown ended without Trump getting the border wall money that motivated the shutdown in the first place.
    1
  51.  @violenceislife1987  You have no evidence I'm being paid because I'm not being paid. Are baseless accusations only okay when you make them? Yes, they are, hypocrite.
    1
  52.  @violenceislife1987  You have no evidence to prove that because I'm not a paid shill. Are baseless accusations only okay when you make them? Apparently, they are, hypocrite.
    1
  53.  @briancooper7116  So you think not having witnesses when every single impeachment trial has had witnesses is the morally superior move? Your hypocrisy is showing.
    1
  54.  @violenceislife1987  You still have not convinced me that you know what a troll is.
    1
  55.  @zanitzeuken  I'm not blaming him for her actions; I'm asking for some consistency. If you're upset that Pelosi withheld the articles (despite there being no rule in the Constitution against it), then McConnell's stance should also upset you. Look at it this way. If you care so much about evidence, why would you let McConnell refuse to allow witnesses? Senate Republicans insist Trump did nothing wrong regarding Ukraine, so this would be the perfect opportunity for them to bring in Joe and Hunter Biden. But they're not going to do that and I think you should be insisting they do, but you're because you're a hypocrite.
    1
  56.  @violenceislife1987  I'm not asking anyone to conform so much as HAVE SOME FUCKING STANDARDS.
    1
  57.  @zanitzeuken  Please show me where in the Constitution it says that what Pelosi did was wrong. I guarantee it isn't there and you're making up excuses. Pelosi isn't demanding a certain outcome; she's demanding McConnell allow witnesses like every single impeachment trial ever. Witness testimony doesn't become invalid just because you arbitrarily decide it is. I know for a fact you're wrong because if it were invalid, Trump would have no issue with members of his administration giving it. As for Ukraine, you're wrong again. Hunter was never the subject of any Ukrainian investigation.
    1
  58.  @zanitzeuken  Quick! What does the Constitution define as an "unnecessary" delay? While you're mulling that over, I'm calling bullshit. Witness testimony, while admittedly being unreliable much of the time, is still used in conjunction with evidence in multiple trials. As for Lunden Roberts, this is the very first I've heard of her, but all the outlets I've seen covering this when I looked it up just now were either conservative outlets or tabloids. Do you have a source that's a little more reputable?
    1
  59.  @violenceislife1987  I'm not calling people hypocrites for not conforming to my standards. I'm calling people hypocrites for NOT HAVING ANY FUCKING STANDARDS.
    1
  60.  @zanitzeuken  1. McConnell has no interest in holding a fair trial. I don't expect him to convict Trump, but he should at the very least let the impeachment trial run like every other impeachment trial in Senate history. He's not doing that, so please tell me how Pelosi withholding the articles is an "unnecessary delay" when the Senate's own rules on impeachment require there to be witnesses. 2. Show me the documents. Because otherwise, I only have the word of you and a private investigator hired by a woman who has a personal grudge against Hunter.
    1
  61.  @zanitzeuken  I'm right here, dude.
    1
  62.  @violenceislife1987  No, you don't, liar.
    1
  63.  @violenceislife1987  You have no evidence to prove it because it isn't true, you lying asshole.
    1
  64.  @zanitzeuken  1. Bullshit. He does not. If a judge ruled on a trial he or she already decided the outcome of before it started and refused to allow witness testimony, that's not a fair trial. And Nadler didn't deny Republican witnesses; they themselves refused to testify. 2. Witness testimony is counted as evidence - either direct or circumstantial - so that's a lie. And even if you were right about that (you're not), what's Trump's evidence of his innocence? A "transcript" that says "not a verbatim transcript" on the first page? Even the falsely accused have legal representation to prove their innocence.
    1
  65.  Doug Odyssey  McConnell doesn't have the 51 votes needed to outright dismiss the articles of impeachment, so I wouldn't be too sure.
    1