The Impeachment Thread

#8,329
#8,329
AM64 said:
I know they are on break. When have politicians ever let that quiet them? They are usually out blathering to their "constituents" and on the news. Maybe they are all on Caribbean junkets inspecting the damage on the wrong islands. You think Schiff for brains missed the recess bell?
Click to expand...
It seems you're completely oblivious to the circumstances and made wild theories about their lack of media presence.
 
#8,331
#8,331
C-south said:
Comprehension isn’t a strong suit I see.
Click to expand...
Sure thing. But keep pounding the “my rights don’t change bc of feelings drum.” It’s literally one of the dumbest arguments anyone has ever made.

The saying does make sense for a stupid t-shirt or hat. Similar to No Fear shirts, the big dog shirts, or MAGA hats.
 
Last edited:
#8,332
#8,332
VolnJC said:
One of the reasons given was there was far more money going to Biden than reported 167k per month vs 50k I guess it pays to be kid of the VP
Click to expand...

Creedence Clearwater Revival covered that topic pretty well back in the '60s with "Fortunate Son". The more things change, the more they don't.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FallCreekVols and VolnJC
#8,333
#8,333
DC_Vol said:
For those of us who cannot follow 1000 posts a day and can not decipher the legalese of the complaint, what are those three primary allegations?
Click to expand...
1) That Donald Trump requested that the Ukrainian President Zelensky, assist his personal attorney, Rudy Giuliani (not the Department of Justice), in an investigation of the Bidens during a phone call on July 25th.

2) That Donald Trump had placed a hold on hundreds of millions of dollars in military aid from the United States to the Ukraine, just a few days prior to the July 25th phone call with Zelensky. This was not publicly known at the time the "whistleblower" submitted the complaint on August 12th.

3) That "The transcript of the call was loaded into a separate electronic system that is otherwise used to store and handle classified information of an especially sensitive nature." even though, there was no other classified "factual" material in the transcript that would have justified a move to a more secure server.
 
#8,334
#8,334
luthervol said:
Not in the least.
I was just refuting Hogg's assertion that he was more open minded simply because he didn't acknowledge that Trump couldn't continue as president.
Click to expand...

Now you've done it. Hog uses one "g", and you've confused him with the FL "take their guns away" kid that uses the double "gg". This won't end well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hog88
#8,335
#8,335
volfanhill said:
How many of your feelings are based on what you believe to be facts? Probably most.
Click to expand...

I’m not a real feelings type person . I try to see the logic and use facts first . Emotions cloud the decision making process . I’m not always successful , some things will naturally pull on the heart strings but when it comes to decisions I believe they are best made without a lot of emotional leanings .
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#8,336
#8,336
Mick said:
It seems you're completely oblivious to the circumstances and made wild theories about their lack of media presence.
Click to expand...

Mick, when have you ever seen a politician not attracted to a microphone like a mosquito to a bug light? You know there's this thing called "GOOGLE", and you can search for all kinds of weird stuff using it. I did that a few days ago; doesn't appear that people on capitol hill plan on doing lots between now and the end of the year. The house especially is taking a lot of time off; I can't figure out how they plan to work in an impeachment thing without some overtime.
 
#8,337
#8,337
The candidate the whistleblower worked with has to be Biden since he was a holdover from the Obama administration
 
#8,338
#8,338
BowlBrother85 said:
1) That Donald Trump requested that the Ukrainian President Zelensky, assist his personal attorney, Rudy Giuliani (not the Department of Justice), in an investigation of the Bidens during a phone call on July 25th.

2) That Donald Trump had placed a hold on hundreds of millions of dollars in military aid from the United States to the Ukraine, just a few days prior to the July 25th phone call with Zelensky. This was not publicly known at the time the "whistleblower" submitted the complaint on August 12th.

3) That "The transcript of the call was loaded into a separate electronic system that is otherwise used to store and handle classified information of an especially sensitive nature." even though, there was no other classified "factual" material in the transcript that would have justified a move to a more secure server.
Click to expand...
I think Trump not cooperating backfires slightly. Democrats were making a big mistake turning this into some huge sweeping investigation of China, Ukraine, etc. it was turning into a hard to follow mess.

I think it was Napoleon Bonaparte who said “never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake.”

Call Taylor, call the whistleblowers. Have the judiciary committee present their findings to the entire House. Hold the vote.
 
  • Like
Reactions: volfanhill
#8,339
#8,339
VolnJC said:
The candidate the whistleblower worked with has to be Biden since he was a holdover from the Obama administration
Click to expand...

As Brit Hume astutely observed, whether that is true or not... it doesn't discredit any of the "whistleblower's" claims. We have the transcript of the call, we don't have to trust the "whistleblower's" word. It doesn't matter if this person is credible or not anymore, because the allegations in the complaint were credible. The IG even said so. I disagree with Hume when he suggests that a connection to Biden would mean the impeachment inquiry was a partisan exercise from the start. The accusation that the President of the United States leveraged military aid to a foreign government against assisting his personal attorney with digging up dirt on a potential opponent in an election is a serious one.
 
#8,340
#8,340
RockyTop85 said:
I think Trump not cooperating backfires slightly. Democrats were making a big mistake turning this into some huge sweeping investigation of China, Ukraine, etc. it was turning into a hard to follow mess.

I think it was Napoleon Bonaparte who said “never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake.”

Call Taylor, call the whistleblowers. Have the judiciary committee present their findings to the entire House. Hold the vote.
Click to expand...
The claim from the Trump attorneys that a sitting president enjoys absolute immunity from a criminal process of any kind, will come back to bite Republicans at some point as well. There are some bad precedents being set here. The Republicans who are defending Trump's obstruction, should keep in mind that there will be a Democrat in the Oval Office again... and perhaps, with a Republican-controlled House. They will NEVER have another subpoena complied with. That means no more fun exhibitions like they had in the Benghazi hearings.
 
#8,341
#8,341
BowlBrother85 said:
The claim from the Trump attorneys that a sitting president enjoys absolute immunity from a criminal process of any kind, will come back to bite Republicans at some point as well. There are some bad precedents being set here. The Republicans who are defending Trump's obstruction, should keep in mind that there will be a Democrat in the Oval Office again... and perhaps, with a Republican-controlled House. They will NEVER have another subpoena complied with. That means no more fun exhibitions like they had in the Benghazi hearings.
Click to expand...
This cuts both ways. Both sides have been setting dangerous precedents since the beginning of Trump's presidency. What's worse is that each side has been cheered on by their base. No one wants to admit how both sides have pushed this too far, to the point it's completely out of hand.

It's unfair and just wrong to blame one side more than the other. Both sides have perpetuated the bad behavior and should be held accountable, but of course, they never will.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64, VolnJC and Sandman 423
#8,342
#8,342
lawgator1 said:
Beyond a reasonable doubt is sooooooo not the standard.
Click to expand...
It is in a trial and, you know it should be in something as important as impeachment and removal from office.

But that's the kind of weak response I would expect from someone who has wanted to impeach for any reason, no matter what.

The real court here is not the House or the Senate but the court of public opinion. This entire Schiff Show is designed to sway public opinion to the point that impeachment and trial is but a mere formality.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#8,345
#8,345
lawgator1 said:
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.
Click to expand...
I don’t see any prosecutor taking something like this to a trial based on your info above because you just admitted you don’t have the real evidence. It just must be there based on the actions of who would be the defendant. Then you call into question the trustworthiness of the defendant when the claimant certainly doesn’t have more credibility, particularly given recent precedent of false accusations. There’s no case here counselor based on what we have today. All you have are what if’s.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64 and tennvols77
#8,346
#8,346
Orange_Crush said:
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.
Click to expand...
Don’t forget Clapper also said he was ordered to make it all public. Given that we now know there was no collusion with the Russians and that all the dirt they “happened upon” from the dossier wasn’t true it comes across as Clapper is nervous about where this is heading. That may not be the case and we will soon see if those guys have anything of substance but that’s how it came across to me. Honestly, I was surprised he was asked the question and certainly surprised at the answer. My gut tells me this will end up just like the Mueller investigation with some random indictments that mean absolutely nothing, perhaps a perjury charge or two, and that’s about it. Well, I could see maybe one lower-level person made the fall guy or gal so that it one ups the Mueller case. I have no idea who that would be but no way Hillary, Biden, Obama, Comey, Clapper, etc. go down here. Maybe Strzok or Page.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#8,348
#8,348
evillawyer said:
Uh, it's a joke, from a comedian. I don't think he's trying to convey news. You dig, or should I break out the crayons and draw you a picture?
Click to expand...
Do jokes only come from comedians? You all go nuts when Trump makes a joke about windmills or Russians finding emails. It’s funny that you can infer tone and intent from a tweet but not from what a person says where you have way more input to decipher such things. I would guess that’s mostly just because you hate Trump but so many people don’t actually talk to others, especially not face to face, that perhaps their skills at reading people are deteriorated. I’m still going with you just hate Trump.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64 and FallCreekVols
#8,349
#8,349
evillawyer said:
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.
Click to expand...
The “everybody does it” excuse was used to defend Bill Clinton during the bimbo eruption.

We’ve come full circle.
 
#8,350
#8,350
Weezer said:
This cuts both ways. Both sides have been setting dangerous precedents since the beginning of Trump's presidency. What's worse is that each side has been cheered on by their base. No one wants to admit how both sides have pushed this too far, to the point it's completely out of hand.

It's unfair and just wrong to blame one side more than the other. Both sides have perpetuated the bad behavior and should be held accountable, but of course, they never will.
Click to expand...
Didn't everyone know that was exactly what a Trump nomination and election would usher in?
I still believe that is largely why he was elected......because the left despised and would never accept him.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top