The Impeachment Thread

[Septic]

Omg it’s a phrase dude, he won the ****ing presidency is that clearer for ****s sake ?

C'mon man. I'm just fuqing with you, was it not obvious? Stop taking the bait.

 

[Septic]

Grumpy cat doesn't look good on you ..... you poor little fella.
I'm not lathered up over Obozo.....he's so 2012. He's yesterday's trash.

Lol, grumpy cat? Wtf does that mean? Is this some sort of Red Hat Trump Club slang?

 

[Septic]

Thanks, Obozo......you done real good of ******* everything up.....f*cked up a lot a schit.

Yeah, you're not lathered up at all.

 

[Coug]

The electoral college represents the American public to prevent mob rule. Take that away and there will be another civil war, eventually.

Wrong KB! 538 individual people do NOT represent the American voter. The electoral college does NOT protect against mob rule or tyranny.

 

[W.TN.Orange Blood]

Lol, grumpy cat? Wtf does that mean? Is this some sort of Red Hat Trump Club slang?

Never mind.....it's bedtime......I have to get up late tomorrow morning to start this all over again.

 

[newarkvol]

Bolton Book Puts New Focus on Trump’s Actions in Turkey and China Cases
Drip...drip...drip
"One of the saddest lessons of history is this: If we’ve been bamboozled long enough, we tend to reject any evidence of the bamboozle. We’re no longer interested in finding out the truth. The bamboozle has captured us. It’s simply too painful to acknowledge, even to ourselves, that we’ve been taken. Once you give a charlatan power over you..."----Carl Sagan

 

[KB5252]

Wrong KB! 538 individual people do NOT represent the American voter. The electoral college does NOT protect against mob rule or tyranny.

Please expound on this opinion.

 

[AM64]

Think maybe it's naptime for the Times..their clarification is more confusing

Dianne is looking kinda old. Maybe she just got confused and forgot they were after Trump - and he's a republican.

 

[RavinDave]

So if I am a Republican Senator facing re-election. Do I vote for witnesses when "polling" suggests 75% want Witnesses and in that 97% of Republicans do not. It's simple math

That says the polling sample was about 72 Democrats to every 28 Republicans.

 

[Coug]

Please expound on this opinion.

There is probably a more appropriate thread to argue that in besides this one.

I'll give you this, between mob rule and tyranny we're witnessing the later of the two as we speak.

 

[W.TN.Orange Blood]

Dianne is looking kinda old. Maybe she just got confused and forgot they were after Trump - and he's a republican.

Kinda old.......she's been old since the 1970s. She had a Chinese spy driver working for her right under her nose for 20 years & didn't even know that. She doesn't know what she's to do by the day until an aide tells her what her schedule is each hour of the day. She's a complete joke or at best she's worst than a joke.

 

[KB5252]

There is probably a more appropriate thread to argue that in besides this one.

I'll give you this, between mob rule and tyranny we're witnessing the later of the two as we speak.

Tyranny? If you believe the current situation as tyranny then I'm not sure what to tell you. That's a stretch at best, and colonial America would laugh you out of this forum. If it's so tyrannical the answer is easy and the path is set, win the next election. This is all theatre.

 

[0nelilreb]

There is probably a more appropriate thread to argue that in besides this one.

I'll give you this, between mob rule and tyranny we're witnessing the later of the two as we speak.

Smh @ tyranny lol

 

[AM64]

Vindman was on the call and Sondland delivered the quid pro quo message for Trump and said as much. So, despite Republicans desperately trying to convince us they were too stupid to understand what Trump really meant, this was not second hand information.

What I'd find far more interesting than the transcripts, tapes, or anything else would be just who was on that call ... and why. Actually who wasn't on the call might be shorter it would seem.

 

[Coug]

Tyranny? If you believe the current situation as tyranny then I'm not sure what to tell you. That's a stretch at best, and colonial America would laugh you out of this forum. If it's so tyrannical the answer is easy and the path is set, win the next election. This is all theatre.

Full blown tyranny, no, not yet. We're inching very close to it if we maintain the status quo. It's all up to this trial as to whether we get closer to tyranny or do the right thing.

 

[0nelilreb]

Full blown tyranny, no, not yet. We're inching very close to it if we maintain the status quo. It's all up to this trial as to whether we get closer to tyranny or do the right thing.

Have you ever seen a country flourish this much before , like this one is doing , with such a tyrannical government ? Smh

 

[volfanhill]

Full blown tyranny, no, not yet. We're inching very close to it if we maintain the status quo. It's all up to this trial as to whether we get closer to tyranny or do the right thing.

In terms of presidential scandals, IMO, this is pretty low. In the sense that he should be rebuked, via censure, but in now way warrants removal. And I think the guy is a giant POS.

Clinton lied under oath. About sexually harassing a young intern in a deposition about sexual harassment. Lied about his predatory behavior.

GW lied us into war with Iraq.

 

[KB5252]

Full blown tyranny, no, not yet. We're inching very close to it if we maintain the status quo. It's all up to this trial as to whether we get closer to tyranny or do the right thing.

LOL, tyranny is not accepting the duly elected president as legitimate. Which is exactly what the left is guilty of. They started this immediately after his election. That is tyranny my friend. We have already entered into the political surreal world. Every president from here out will get equal treatment, soon after election the opposition will go into full court political press. I guess I agree with you to some extent, just differ on who to place blame.

 

[AM64]

And good old Prez Z says there was never any pressure, threat or leverage. I don't believe the testimony about Trump's plan to leverage, but even if I did, the plan wasn't impeachable.

If I talked to my wife, planning to rob a bank so we can retire to Kokomo, and she begged me not to because it's a crime and I might get caught. Even if the NSA recorded the conversation through my smart TV, they could never convict me because I didn't go through with it. My wife talked me out of it.

There.
Was.
No.
Crime.

It would speak to my character. And I agree Trump is a low character oaf. It's why I didn't vote for him and won't this year either.

But there is no evidence whatsoever that he ever strong armed Ukraine, threatened them with the aid, or withheld the aid. There is actually evidence (Prez Z testimony) that he never made a threat, and proof that the aid wasn't withheld.

I don't know, OC. I think threats (even not acted on) are moving into the criminal category these days. The thought police can't be far behind.

 

[volfanhill]

LOL, tyranny is not accepting the fully elected president as legitimate. Which is exactly what the left is guilty of. They started this immediately after his election. That is tyranny my friend. We have anyway entered into the political surreal world. Every president from here out will get equal treatment, soon after election the opposition will go into full court political press. I guess I agree with you to some extent, just differ on who to place blame.

Meh the left claimed the same “everyone will get impeached from now on” crap with Clinton. It’s not true

 

[0nelilreb]

In terms of presidential scandals, IMO, this is pretty low. In the sense that he should be rebuked, via censure, but in now way warrants removal. And I think the guy is a giant POS.

Clinton lied under oath. About sexually harassing a young intern in a deposition about sexual harassment. Lied about his predatory behavior.

GW lied us into war with Iraq.

Either Coug doesn’t know what tyranny means , or he’s spending way too much time on a reddit far left board .

 

[AM64]

Vindman was on the call (you know, the one that Trump insists was perfect) and made it clear he saw it as a partisan play. The only part I remember him saying wasn't malicious was the Trump edit of the transcript. I'm not watching the whole video of something I've already seen. You're going to have to give me the timestamp if you're talking about something more specific.

As far as Sondland, the "presumption" was about the aid. He made it clear the meeting was conditional on the investigation.

And there you have it. Vindman auditioning for the thought police.

 

[KB5252]

Meh the left claimed the same “everyone will get impeached from now on” crap with Clinton. It’s not true

I think it will be from here out. It's odd that so many democrat family members are tied to Ukraine fuel businesses tied of this scandal. All politicians are guilty of something, now they can all answer for it.

 

[AM64]

Nice take. Aid released on September 27. This can't be argued

The question still remains, that if congress said aid up to x amount by such and such date, was that a deadline or an expiration date. If the DOD could just as well have delivered half the amount or nothing, then how can it even be argued that the date was a deadline?

 

[Matt2496]

Why are we giving aid to foreign countries to begin with? Don't we have enough problems in our own country?