This about sums it up..

[Deleted User 12047]

I feel like I have spent my career watching the same depressing dynamic that unspooled Friday night: Democrats trying, sometimes ineptly, to play fair and Republicans ruthlessly trying to win.

[audiophile]

That's bias. They are both ruthlessly trying to win.

[Rate This]

That's bias. They are both ruthlessly trying to win.

The Democrats have always been weaker on that front... the GOP is absolutely the Machiavellian party... the Democrats play nice and get walked over repeatedly...

[audiophile]

Give me a break, they don't play nice either. The hit jobs they tried on Clarence Thomas instantly comes to mind. More recently the Russian conspiracy, impeachment, it goes on and on.

[bmw]

I view it as the exact opposite. Democrats play to win, by any means. Always have. Republicans are usually spineless and roll over and play dead - except in the age of Trump. Dems aren't used to not always having their way and the Republicans finding a backbone, and THAT is why they're now inept.

Also, the suggestion that Democrats played fair in the impeachment proceedings, first in the House (a bunch of closed-door proceedings literally in the basement), and then withholding the articles of impeachment, using that as leverage to try to exert power they didn't have, over the Senate proceedings, is a joke. The Dems KNEW they weren't going to win on this issue - it was a 100% certainty. But they dragged these proceedings out for months anyways, all with the sole goal of bloodying up Trump going into 2020, and putting that * next to his name in the history books (even several liberal posters in here admitted to the latter). That is playing fair? Give me a break.

[bmw]

Also, as far as Friday night specifically is concerned (I assume she's referring to the vote to block witnesses) - it was the correct outcome. It isn't the Senate's job to do what the House failed to do. The fact that the House moved forward with its weak-ass articles of impeachment without having done proper investigative work is their own fault.

I am at the suggestion that the only reason the impeachment ended the way it did was because Republicans didn't play fair (while the Democrats did). This is just more sore-loser-syndrome on display.

[Rate This]

Also, as far as Friday night specifically is concerned (I assume she's referring to the vote to block witnesses) - it was the correct outcome. It isn't the Senate's job to do what the House failed to do. The fact that the House moved forward with its weak-ass articles of impeachment without having done proper investigative work is their own fault.

I am at the suggestion that the only reason the impeachment ended the way it did was because Republicans didn't play fair (while the Democrats did). This is just more sore-loser-syndrome on display.

They could have gone through the courts... but Trump would have drug that out so long that the articles would have been meaningless. He does that with everything... sues to get his way, drag it out and bury it. The Democrats didn’t take the bait. The Democrats have been spineless and disorganized since time immemorial... we don’t play to win... not in the slightest. You know who does? Newt Gingrich and Mitch McConnell were two that come to mind. We capitulate and lose on a lot of things. I can’t see Chuck Schumer holding back a Supreme Court nominee for example for “the voters to decide first”... not their style.

[audiophile]

Doesn't explain their hasty vote without more witnesses, then only to sit on it for three weeks.

Face it, this was dog and pony show.

[Rate This]

Doesn't explain their hasty vote without more witnesses, then only to sit on it for three weeks.

Face it, this was dog and pony show.

Yes it does... stall for 9 months to a year while it winds its way through the courts and is forgotten or strike while the iron is hot and try to get the senate to do what it did the other 2 impeachements and call witnesses. Plus some of that time was the Christmas recess. Are you gonna try to sell the idea that the senate was gonna suddenly be holding a trial over Christmas? Nobody is gonna buy that. The senate would have sat on the articles if they had been sent over. It’s just a talking point and nothing more.

[audiophile]

What was wrong with getting more witness on Jan 2? Nothing.

Going out by request for Nancy in Washington, DC:

Oh baby, hurry, hurry, rush, rush...

[Rate This]

What was wrong with getting more witness on Jan 2? Nothing.

Going out by request for Nancy in Washington, DC:

Oh baby, hurry, hurry, rush, rush...

The articles were already voted on and it was done first of all. Secondly the Senate should have called witnesses. It happened the first two trials and they would have spent potentially over a year taking it all the way to the Supreme Court. Why do that when the senate can simply do what it did twice before. This idea that only the house calls witnesses is the biggest pile of horseshit the defense had going.