Russia bounty on US troops

[hUTch2002]

However, Trump is the only person calling it a hoax. So, in a way, this is about Trump... and why is he taking Russia's side? Why does he always side with a Russia? That is not an unreasonable question. It is strange.

I’ve been giving you crap because it’s fun but I don’t think it’s unreasonable to ask questions about his relationship there. The thing is, none of us know the answer and if he is showing favor towards Russia there could be tons of reasons as to why. It’s easy for you to assume the worst because you don’t like Trump. You could be exactly right but you could also be 100% wrong, we just don’t know. I believe that pretty much every politician in Washington is doing something they shouldn’t be doing that we don’t know about. Some of it may be as simple as affairs while others may border on treason. None of them are to be trusted fully. You find the Dems more tolerable and I find the Reps but both sides carry inherent risk. In a perfect world as a country we would start working towards a way to start making sure we actually had multiple choices from a group of great people rather than holding our nose while we essentially pick between the Dems or Reps. Yes there are other candidates but they have no real chance. I don’t have the answers but I know the current system isn’t it.

 

[hUTch2002]

So what did Obama do about it?

Jack **** obviously.

You libs......whew!

Obama did do something with Russia. Something about flexibility. Hmmm...

 

[BowlBrother85]

Complete the following...

(1) By far the greatest number of Trump's telephone discussions with an individual head of state were with _________________.

(2) Trump Towers are a pair of glass buildings in __________ that have borne Trump’s name since 2012. Trump doesn’t own the buildings—the situation might be less complicated if he did. Instead, Trump licenses his brand to the building’s actual owner, ___________ business magnate Aydin Dogan, who has been described as the single largest payer of taxes in ___________.

I believe the motives behind Donald Trump's Russian affinity are financially driven (greed), but I think it has to be something more than just this. Trump has been promised a deal that we don't yet know about.

 

[Orangeburst]

There is not a good reason for Donald Trump to be calling this intelligence a hoax. There is not a good reason for why Donald Trump always sides with Putin's denial. That an American President keeps publicly defending Russia like this, is strange... and it is tiresome.

Win 2020 then. I am tired and done with the whine fest.

 

[BowlBrother85]

Obama did do something with Russia. Something about flexibility. Hmmm...

That hot mic moment is frequently cited, but does anyone know what he meant by "flexibility"? The Fox News people sure pounced... but what did it lead to? Nobody can really say. Those same Fox News pundits have never made an issue of Trump's open fondness for Putin.

 

[hUTch2002]

That hot mic moment is frequently cited, but does anyone know what he meant by "flexibility"? The Fox News people sure pounced... but what did it lead to? Nobody can really say. Those same Fox News pundits have never made an issue of Trump's open fondness for Putin.

They didn’t need to with the lunacy from CNN, MSNBC, and the like. You’re right that we have no idea what that meant just like there’s much about Trump’s intentions we don’t know.

 

[hUTch2002]

There is not a good reason for Donald Trump to be calling this intelligence a hoax. There is not a good reason for why Donald Trump always sides with Putin's denial. That an American President keeps publicly defending Russia like this, is strange... and it is tiresome.

There is not a good reason for a Democrats to try and throw Trump out of office. They’ve investigated him nonstop and tried to dig up dirt and overturn every rock to get something on him. They’ve come up completely empty. At what point do they actually try to win 2020 rather than continuously trying to overturn 2016?

 

[BowlBrother85]

There is not a good reason for a Democrats to try and throw Trump out of office. They’ve investigated him nonstop and tried to dig up dirt and overturn every rock to get something on him. They’ve come up completely empty. At what point do they actually try to win 2020 rather than continuously trying to overturn 2016?

I find this to be an odd choice of words, considering what Trump was trying to do to Biden on the July 25th phone call with President Zelensky of the Ukraine. They didn't exactly come up empty on that call. Trump did exactly what the whistleblower and Democrats had accused him of doing.

 

[hUTch2002]

I find this to be an odd choice of words, considering what Trump was trying to do to Biden on the July 25th phone call with President Zelensky of the Ukraine. They didn't exactly come up empty on that call. Trump did exactly what the whistleblower and Democrats had accused him of doing.

M-T

 

[DynaLo]

I find this to be an odd choice of words, considering what Trump was trying to do to Biden on the July 25th phone call with President Zelensky of the Ukraine. They didn't exactly come up empty on that call. Trump did exactly what the whistleblower and Democrats had accused him of doing.

Well, Biden is at a minimum shady as shite if not downright guilty as hell with the Ukrainian crap or have you not bothered to listen to the press conference from the Ukrainians and the recordings of conversations between Biden and Petro that they play.

 

[BowlBrother85]

M-T

Donald Trump will forever be an impeached President. So not quite.

 

[Weezer]

Donald Trump will forever be an impeached President. So not quite.

Impeachment is now just a new political tool for a House of an opposing party to attack the POTUS. At some point, I expect a GOP controlled House will return the favor of a pointless impeachment to a Dem POTUS, and Republicans will issue the same refrain. "forever impeached". It's the new political theater, and ultimately, it's as meaningless now as it will be then.

 

[VFFL@THE BEACH]

Were you talking about someone other than President Trump? If you don't know how to spell it correctly I apologize.
I "called out" Mick for not seeing your hypocrisy. My comment to you was to make fun of the fact that you Joe Bidened your comment.

Geez Sandman this is a little embarrassing.

I apologize that you don't know that drumpf is trump. His grandfather changed the name. This is the same grandfather that had his Bavarian citizenship revoked for avoiding mandatory military service and ran a brothel. Sound familiar??

The media does it wrong, drumpf supporters aren't stupid they just aren't willing to think critically. They are the kind of people happy with their fast food and drumpf nicknames.

Does this mean you "Bidened" the comment?

 

[VFFL@THE BEACH]

Impeachment is now just a new political tool for a House of an opposing party to attack the POTUS. At some point, I expect a GOP controlled House will return the favor of a pointless impeachment to a Dem POTUS, and Republicans will issue the same refrain. "forever impeached". It's the new political theater, and ultimately, it's as meaningless now as it will be then.

It was only meaningless because the right witness were not subpoenaed and or forced to testify. Really a travesty to American politics in general.

The really scary part is the fact that the Republicans did not hold their man accountable. Now that presidents can violate checks and balances is something that should scare everyone to death. Well unless of course you want a king.

If and or when checks and balances are violated again, I hope the person is held accountable, regardless of political party.

 

[Weezer]

It was only meaningless because the right witness were not subpoenaed and or forced to testify. Really a travesty to American politics in general.

The really scary part is the fact that the Republicans did not hold their man accountable. Now that presidents can violate checks and balances is something that should scare everyone to death. Well unless of course you want a king.

If and or when checks and balances are violated again, I hope the person is held accountable, regardless of political party.

No, the scary part is there was never enough teeth to merit impeachment, but the Dems ran with it anyway. The House could have subpoenaed whoever they wanted, but didn't, then pushed forward an impeachment always doomed to fail. I completely understand not liking Trump, but not liking him is not suitable grounds for impeachment. I've said all along, if you want him gone, then win in 2020. Of course, I had hoped the Dems would find a better candidate.

 

[VFFL@THE BEACH]

I agree that a personal opinion is not grounds for impeachment but there was more to this impeachment.

Violating the U.S. Constitution dosen't have enough teeth? By his own admission he delayed or stopped a payment authorized by the HoR. So the president just overrides other branches of government whenever he wants. Is the Supreme Court next? I certainly hope not.

I agree about Biden, much like 2016. I can name 3 candidates in both parties that I would rather see become president.

This thing won't get turned around until people start paying attention to local elections and attracting better U.S. presidential candidates.

 

[BowlBrother85]

Impeachment is now just a new political tool for a House of an opposing party to attack the POTUS. At some point, I expect a GOP controlled House will return the favor of a pointless impeachment to a Dem POTUS, and Republicans will issue the same refrain. "forever impeached". It's the new political theater, and ultimately, it's as meaningless now as it will be then.

At some point? They already did... in 1998. That was strictly a party line vote to impeach. At least there was a cross party vote to convict in the Senate with Trump (Romney)... The Republicans didn't have that for Clinton.

 

[NorthDallas40]

At some point? They already did... in 1998. That was strictly a party line vote to impeach. At least there was a cross party vote to convict in the Senate with Trump (Romney)... The Republicans didn't have that for Clinton.

 

[Weezer]

At some point? They already did... in 1998. That was strictly a party line vote to impeach. At least there was a cross party vote to convict in the Senate with Trump (Romney)... The Republicans didn't have that for Clinton.

Been over this. First of all, Clinton's impeachment was not political. He committed an actual crime(perjury). His committal of the crime had nothing to do with GOP machinations. He even admitted he committed the crime, yet somehow Dems cannot get past blaming Republicans.
He lied under oath during a deposition for the Paula Jones sexual harassment case. At her own discretion with no outside influence, Linda Tripp taped conversations with Monica Lewinsky that proved Bill Clinton had lied under oath. She then dropped those tapes in the lap of Ken Starr. So, is it your opinion that such conclusive evidence of a crime by the POTUS should have been ignored, simply because he shared your political affiliation? Seems to be what you're suggesting. And if you don't think there was a cross party vote to acquit Clinton by the Senate, you need to check the votes. Of the two charges, I believe ten Republicans voted to acquit on one charge, and five on the other. This despite conclusive evidence a crime was committed. Check your facts.

 

[Weezer]

I agree that a personal opinion is not grounds for impeachment but there was more to this impeachment.

Violating the U.S. Constitution dosen't have enough teeth? By his own admission he delayed or stopped a payment authorized by the HoR. So the president just overrides other branches of government whenever he wants. Is the Supreme Court next? I certainly hope not.

I agree about Biden, much like 2016. I can name 3 candidates in both parties that I would rather see become president.

This thing won't get turned around until people start paying attention to local elections and attracting better U.S. presidential candidates.

The payment was made by the appointed deadline. No violation. No overriding anyone.

Trump is a douche, but the facts are not on the side of the Dems to justify impeachment. It was obvious that they started looking for anything the moment he won the election. People can claim otherwise, but it was clearly a tantrum like reaction to Hillary losing. Pelosi knew they had nothing, which is why she kept delaying, but finally caved to the will of the rest of the party, then presided over a rushed impeachment because they knew they had the votes based on simple political loyalty. Trump may have acted unethically, but he did not act illegally, which is the key part of the whole argument. He was impeached because they did not like him, not because he had broken any laws.

The Dems should not have wasted time with an impeachment always doomed to fail. It had NO legs. They could have and should have spent that time cultivating a candidate, someone better than Biden, to run in this election. Now we're stuck with two bad choices, again.

For change to happen, people need to wake up to reality. They need to stop believing what the parties or the MSM tell them to believe and think for themselves. We live in a world full of narratives, stories that people want you to believe. Hell, it's like the movie The Matrix, only this is real life. People need to break free and think for themselves. Look behind the curtain.

 

[BowlBrother85]

The payment was made by the appointed deadline. No violation. No overriding anyone.

Trump is a douche, but the facts are not on the side of the Dems to justify impeachment. It was obvious that they started looking for anything the moment he won the election. People can claim otherwise, but it was clearly a tantrum like reaction to Hillary losing. Pelosi knew they had nothing, which is why she kept delaying, but finally caved to the will of the rest of the party, then presided over a rushed impeachment because they knew they had the votes based on simple political loyalty. Trump may have acted unethically, but he did not act illegally, which is the key part of the whole argument. He was impeached because they did not like him, not because he had broken any laws.

The Dems should not have wasted time with an impeachment always doomed to fail. It had NO legs. They could have and should have spent that time cultivating a candidate, someone better than Biden, to run in this election. Now we're stuck with two bad choices, again.

For change to happen, people need to wake up to reality. They need to stop believing what the parties or the MSM tell them to believe and think for themselves. We live in a world full of narratives, stories that people want you to believe. Hell, it's like the movie The Matrix, only this is real life. People need to break free and think for themselves. Look behind the curtain.

No, it was not. That is something Trump liked to say, but it's not true. The payment was late on that military aid as result of the freeze.

 

[BowlBrother85]

Been over this. First of all, Clinton's impeachment was not political. He committed an actual crime(perjury). His committal of the crime had nothing to do with GOP machinations. He even admitted he committed the crime, yet somehow Dems cannot get past blaming Republicans.
He lied under oath during a deposition for the Paula Jones sexual harassment case. At her own discretion with no outside influence, Linda Tripp taped conversations with Monica Lewinsky that proved Bill Clinton had lied under oath. She then dropped those tapes in the lap of Ken Starr. So, is it your opinion that such conclusive evidence of a crime by the POTUS should have been ignored, simply because he shared your political affiliation? Seems to be what you're suggesting. And if you don't think there was a cross party vote to acquit Clinton by the Senate, you need to check the votes. Of the two charges, I believe ten Republicans voted to acquit on one charge, and five on the other. This despite conclusive evidence a crime was committed. Check your facts.

Of course, it was political. It was completely down party lines. And it cost Gingrich dearly.

 

[Weezer]

Of course, it was political. It was completely down party lines. And it cost Gingrich dearly.

Check that Senate vote. You are wrong. It was not completely down party lines. Clinton committed an actual crime. He admitted he committed that crime. You believe what you were told, which apparently was not the truth. Again, check your facts.

 

[Electric Orange]

 

[BowlBrother85]

Check that Senate vote. You are wrong. It was not completely down party lines. Clinton committed an actual crime. He admitted he committed that crime. You believe what you were told, which apparently was not the truth. Again, check your facts.

What I meant, was that there weren't any Democratic Senators who voted to convict Clinton in 1998. All of the votes in favor of conviction, were Republican. However, Trump did have a Republican vote in favor of conviction with Mitt Romney.