The Impeachment Thread

[MontyPython]

Oh dear God, really Trey "that inbred boy from Deliverance" Gowdy?

Google Image Result for https://ca-times.brightspotcdn.com/dims4/default/e401237/2147483647/strip/true/crop/2048x1152+0+0/resize/840x473!/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fca-times.brightspotcdn.com%2Ffa%2Fc3%2Fa0200b2ca96839b48bb101798d9c%2Fla-na-tt-deliverance-from-gowdy-20151023-001

Nonono. Pretty sure they meant Curt Gowdy. Makes more sense.

 

[MontyPython]

I don't understand how this could be possibly argued as a Quid Pro Quo without a mutual agreement that if you don't do this then you don't get that. The holdup of the 400 million was never discussed with the Ukrainians and they got the money without doing any investigating. Bidens case is a no brainier he admitted to it on camera. View attachment 230070

 

[VolnJC]

View attachment 230081

So you can't answer the question I guess

 

[Orange_Crush]

Why, I'm shocked I tell you............shocked to the core that there would be favoritism here in this thread.
You say that like you know what went on in the secret meetings.........are you the mole everyone is looking for?

He's rightfully saying that that's not what Clapper did. He didn't say that Obama sicked them on Trump. All he's said is that Obama ordered them to look into Russian activities per 2016 election. We can infer a lot from that, but that inference is different from the "game, set, match" moment many conservatives are setting it up to be.

Considering conservative attitudes about that compared to Trump inferences, it's a double-standard.

Considering the liberal's attitude about this Clapper quote, compared to how they treat supposed "evidence" against Trump, it's a pretty huge double-standard.

This entire thing is tiring, and reveals as much about the character of the participants here as it does the actors they discuss.

 

[MontyPython]

So you can't answer the question I guess

Good god man. The three parts of quid pro quo don't actually have to be contained in ONE CALL to have them exist.

1. Trump withdrew the $ to Ukraine.
2. Trump has a call with Ukraine.
3. Trump says he needs a favor.

If you don't get it, well. On you.

 

[VolnJC]

Good god man. The three parts of quid pro quo don't actually have to be contained in ONE CALL to have them exist.

1. Trump withdrew the $ to Ukraine.
2. Trump has a call with Ukraine.
3. Trump says he needs a favor.

If you don't get it, well. On you.

And the Ukrainians have said they weren't pressured and were never told about the holdup so your theory doesn't hold up about mutual participation

 

[MontyPython]

Trump sprucing up his bullpen.

Brings in star from Saving Ryan's Privates.







My goodness, and my fortress; my high tower, and my deliverer; my shield, and he in whom I trust; who subdueth my people under me.

O my God, I trust in thee: let me not be ashamed, let not mine enemies triumph over me.

 

[MontyPython]

And the Ukrainians have said they weren't pressured and were never told about the holdup so your theory doesn't hold up about mutual participation

Dude, seriously. Do the Ukrainians currently need Trump's $? Do they want to make him happy? Yes. They're going to say anything right now to get $400M.

Regardless, it's moot. The proof is in the pudding. Read the transcript.

 

[C-south]

Good god man. The three parts of quid pro quo don't actually have to be contained in ONE CALL to have them exist.

1. Trump withdrew the $ to Ukraine.
2. Trump has a call with Ukraine.
3. Trump says he needs a favor.

If you don't get it, well. On you.

So the actual Biden corruption doesn’t matter? I mean there’s actual evidence of it yet we’re going off 2 hand hearsay because muh Trump.

 

[lawgator1]

This was an honest not flaming question...we have lawyers on here so I thought someone might be able to assist


I don't understand how this could be possibly argued as a Quid Pro Quo without a mutual agreement that if you don't do this then you don't get that. The holdup of the 400 million was never discussed with the Ukrainians and they got the money without doing any investigating. Bidens case is a no brainier he admitted to it on camera.

I think you are factually wrong. The circumstantial evidence here that there was a quid pro quo intent by Trump is very, very strong. The timing alone screams it. No reasonable alternative explanation has been given as to why it was tied up. If there was one, it would have been tendered by now.

If this were a legal case, which it is not but to use your analogy, based solely on what is known now, there is more than enough to go to a jury. And I think you have to admit that the actions of the administration also suggest strongly that such evidence exists, either by testimony or documentation, they know it exists, and the entire focus right now is keeping that from going public.

Note as well on this front that denials of such have come from two people: Trump and Giuliani. Neither of whom I think anyone in their right mind would trust to tell the truth on this issue. Trump has proven himself to be a liar about far, far less. And Giuliani is a loyal soldier and would knowingly lie about it, so his testimony on the subject is literally worthless.

 

[GVF]

Because that's all they got. They can't say Trump is not corrupt. The best they got is that he's no worse than others.

Probably more like it's obvious you turn a blind eye to pay to play, when it's your side. But, illegal when it's Trump. Ya'll are pretty blatant about that. It doesn't have so much to do with them It's just you guys.

 

[VolnJC]

Do

Dude, seriously. Do the Ukrainians currently need Trump's $? Do they want to make him happy? Yes. They're going to say anything right now to get $400M.

Regardless, it's moot. The proof is in the pudding. Read the transcript.

Do us a favor doesn't translate to a Quid Pro Quo.. I say that 3 or 4 times a week without expecting anything in return that is quite a stretch you are making

 

[GVF]

I think you are factually wrong. The circumstantial evidence here that there was a quid pro quo intent by Trump is very, very strong. The timing alone screams it. No reasonable alternative explanation has been given as to why it was tied up. If there was one, it would have been tendered by now.

If this were a legal case, which it is not but to use your analogy, based solely on what is known now, there is more than enough to go to a jury. And I think you have to admit that the actions of the administration also suggest strongly that such evidence exists, either by testimony or documentation, they know it exists, and the entire focus right now is keeping that from going public.

Note as well on this front that denials of such have come from two people: Trump and Giuliani. Neither of whom I think anyone in their right mind would trust to tell the truth on this issue. Trump has proven himself to be a liar about far, far less. And Giuliani is a loyal soldier and would knowingly lie about it, so his testimony on the subject is literally worthless.

Oh...so you guys lean heavy on circumstantial evidence now? Hey, we don't have the necessary criminal evidence, so we are gonna do the same thing with circumstantial eveidence.

 

[W.TN.Orange Blood]

Dude, seriously. Do the Ukrainians currently need Trump's $? Do they want to make him happy? Yes. They're going to say anything right now to get $400M.

Regardless, it's moot. The proof is in the pudding. Read the transcript.

It sounds like you're the one that needs to read it. Your missing some brain cells I do believe.
You're about to stroke out over BS that matters nothing to your little life.
Just so long as your side wins.........what do you guys win......a trophy w/M&M candy? Hooray...

 

[AM64]

Just like there is a significant divide in the "mainstream" Democrats and the liberal wing of the party.

I hope they both fracture. The more political parties, the better it is for the nation as a whole.

I agree, but end the end it always comes back to just two. Look at sports dozens of teams in all sports and it always comes down to two. Football has over a hundred teams in the top level, had several quality bowl games, and a lot of good competition through the regular and bowl seasons. We had to throw most of that away just to have two teams playing for a nonsensical "national championship" so one could hold bragging rights over the other. As long as elections are a "contest" and an advertising event, it's always going to come down to two parties.

If the Democrat Party fractures, that will be a good thing. It won't lead to long term multiple parties though. Either the libs will slink away in defeat, and eventually kiss and make up, or the right part of the dims will become GOP. It's who we are ... one way or the other - no room for more independent thought.

 

[MontyPython]

So the actual Biden corruption doesn’t matter? I mean there’s actual evidence of it yet we’re going off 2 hand hearsay because muh Trump.

Biden is not the most powerful man on earth, Trump is.

If Biden did something, swell, investigate it.

 

[GVF]

It sounds like you're the one that needs to read it. Your missing some brain cells I do believe.
You're about to stroke out over BS that matters nothing to your little life.

Even the texts that say no quid pro quo proves Trump is guilty, because it just has to.

 

[W.TN.Orange Blood]

Biden is not the most powerful man on earth, Trump is.

If Biden did something, swell, investigate it.

If he was found guilty as all hell you'd cry all day that it was a rigged investigation & the facts were false.
There's just no way to please you libs that ignore all the True Facts.

 

[VolnJC]

Biden is not the most powerful man on earth, Trump is.

If Biden did something, swell, investigate it.

But Biden is running to be the most powerful man on Earth and the same ppl wanting to impeach Trump seem to have no prob with Joe since he is still leading in many of the polls

 

[MontyPython]

It sounds like you're the one that needs to read it. Your missing some brain cells I do believe.
You're about to stroke out over BS that matters nothing to your little life.
Just so long as your side wins.........what do you guys win......a trophy w/M&M candy? Hooray...

Well, thankfully I'm in the majority (58%) who supports the impeachment inquiry.

Enjoy!

 

[37L1]

I think you are factually wrong. The circumstantial evidence here that there was a quid pro quo intent by Trump is very, very strong. The timing alone screams it. No reasonable alternative explanation has been given as to why it was tied up. If there was one, it would have been tendered by now.

If this were a legal case, which it is not but to use your analogy, based solely on what is known now, there is more than enough to go to a jury. And I think you have to admit that the actions of the administration also suggest strongly that such evidence exists, either by testimony or documentation, they know it exists, and the entire focus right now is keeping that from going public.

Note as well on this front that denials of such have come from two people: Trump and Giuliani. Neither of whom I think anyone in their right mind would trust to tell the truth on this issue. Trump has proven himself to be a liar about far, far less. And Giuliani is a loyal soldier and would knowingly lie about it, so his testimony on the subject is literally worthless.

What is reasonable? These could seem "reasonable" and have been tendered for quite some time now. Either you missed them (surprise) or you don't think they are "reasonable" (surprise).

"Bill, I believe you are incorrect about President Trump's intentions. The President has been crystal clear: no quid pro quo’s of any kind. The President is trying to evaluate whether Ukraine is truly going to adopt the transparency and reforms that President Zelenskiy promised during his campaign," Sondland says.


"I said hold it up," Trump told reporters during a photo-op with the U.K Prime Minister Boris Johnson. "Let's get others to pay."

"I made that loud and clear," he said and "told it to a lot of people."

His argument that European nations needed to contribute more to Ukraine was a new reason given for his claim he was concerned about sending aid -- beyond the "corruption" in Ukraine that he’s previously cited.

The Washington Post was first to report that Trump ordered Acting Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney to hold back almost $400 million in military aid at least a week before the July 25 phone call.

Officials at the State Department and the Pentagon were told the president had “concerns” about corruption in Ukraine and wanted to analyze whether the money needed to be spent, the Post cited officials as saying and ABC News confirmed.

“As far as withholding funds, those funds were paid. They were fully paid. But my complaint has always been and I withhold again and I'll continue to withhold until such time as Europe and other nations contribute to Ukraine,” Trump said.
He continued: “What I want and I insist on it is Europe has to put up money for Ukraine also. Why is it only the United States putting up the money? And by the way, we paid that money. But I always ask, aren't other countries in Europe especially putting up money for Ukraine?”

Trump froze aid before call with Ukraine's president asking him to probe Biden

 

[W.TN.Orange Blood]

Well, thankfully I'm in the majority (58%) who supports the impeachment inquiry.

Enjoy!

Majority doesn't make it true or right.......Your gal Hillary lost w/a majority %.
All this BS is revenge for the Dems losing in 2016. Crybaby Dems didn't get their way so let's make America pay.
Dems want to punish Trump voters bc they lost an election and hate everybody for their terrible ways to govern.

 

[GVF]

Well, thankfully I'm in the majority (58%) who supports the impeachment inquiry.

Enjoy!

Same polls that let you down last time ??

 

[VolnJC]

I'm guessing Biden.

 

[Rifleman]

Trump sprucing up his bullpen.

Brings in star from Saving Ryan's Privates.

View attachment 230084



View attachment 230085

My goodness, and my fortress; my high tower, and my deliverer; my shield, and he in whom I trust; who subdueth my people under me.

O my God, I trust in thee: let me not be ashamed, let not mine enemies triumph over me.

Much of that movie was pretty good overall. There were two really stupid Hollywood moments I recall.

1) Allies deep underwater were torn apart by German machine gun fire. That's not how physics works.

2) From 100s of yards away and 100s of feet lower the American sniper shoots the German sniper straight through the rifle scope . . . so no arc on the bullet at all? LOL