The Impeachment Thread

[Septic]

Spent 3 weeks at Hood, that was 3 weeks too long

Try PLDC at Polk in August.

 

[Stew Cook]

Spent 3 weeks at Hood, that was 3 weeks too long

I had command level sham job, otherwise it'd sucked, big time.

 

[hog88]

Try PLDC at Polk in August.

JRTC at Polk in July
Desert Phase at Hood in Feb
NTC at Irwin in Sept

 

[Stew Cook]

Try PLDC at Polk in August.

Spent a year there before Hood... It's pretty much what I imagine Hell to be.

 

[Septic]

JRTC at Polk in July
Desert Phase at Hood in Feb
NTC at Irwin in Sept

you win.

 

[Stew Cook]

JRTC at Polk in July
Desert Phase at Hood in Feb
NTC at Irwin in Sept

Three times NTC at Irwin.. I actually enjoyed it. Almost ran over a general once.. he was a good sport.

 

[Septic]

Spent a year there before Hood... It's pretty much what I imagine Hell to be.

Did you ever see the Hind they flew around Polk?

 

[hog88]

you win.

Even did a JRTC rotation when it was at FT Chaffee. Talk about the azzhole of the world.

 

[BowlBrother85]

This nails some of the Dems on here...10 ppl can testify to no Quid pro quo but if one says something different all the rest are lying lol

And that tweet is stupid. Kurt Volker testified that there was nothing to Trump's allegations against Joe Biden. To say that those theories are "indisputable" is just ridiculous.

 

[hog88]

Three times NTC at Irwin.. I actually enjoyed it. Almost ran over a general once.. he was a good sport.

NTC sucked balls, once was enough.

 

[FLVOL_79]

Yet it justified impeaching Clinton?

He actually committed legitimate crimes, lying under oath and real obstruction of justice (not made up Russian hoax obstruction). Now you'll have the dims going after Trump with literal hearsay. Not sure its going to work out too well for them.

 

[BowlBrother85]

He actually committed legitimate crimes, lying under oath and real obstruction of justice (not made up Russian hoax obstruction). Now you'll have the dims going after Trump with literal hearsay. Not sure its going to work out too well for them.

Not after today. Once again, Vindman was on the call.

 

[Stew Cook]

Did you ever see the Hind they flew around Polk?

I could have, but at the time I wouldn't have known it from a Huey

 

[hog88]

Not after today. Once again, Vindman was on the call.

What did he say?

 

[Stew Cook]

Three times NTC at Irwin.. I actually enjoyed it. Almost ran over a general once.. he was a good sport.

Well, I worked and slept in an Expando Van with AC, except for one time. But I wouldn't want to do it again, either way.

 

[FLVOL_79]

Oh snap, that cartoon nailed the Stanford/Harvard Law former AUSA. In contrast, this is a real picture of the community college/agriculture grad that will head up the GOP questioning

I find it amusing that you would belittle someone who has a non ivy league college education while grabbing your ankles for someone who does. Its almost like you haven't actually been to college and understand that name recognition, and price, is the only difference.

 

[FLVOL_79]

Did you ever see the Hind they flew around Polk?

We had a Hind at Hurlburt.

 

[FLVOL_79]

Lol @ you Army guys not staying at Holiday Inns during training exercises.

 

[FLVOL_79]

Not after today. Once again, Vindman was on the call.

Its still hearsay. Unless he can hand over a copy of the audio recording its hearsay. While the phone call was retarded, Trump "got ahead of it" by releasing a transcript. Its the only real hard evidence...hell..maybe the only tangible evidence at this point. Who knows though.

 

[BowlBrother85]

What did he say?

Don't know yet but whatever it was, it's a firsthand account.

 

[BowlBrother85]

Its still hearsay. Unless he can hand over a copy of the audio recording its hearsay. While the phone call was retarded, Trump "got ahead of it" by releasing a transcript. Its the only real hard evidence...hell..maybe the only tangible evidence at this point. Who knows though.

No, it's a firsthand account. Whether or not it's accurate, can be debated but he isn't relying on the memory of others. It isn't hearsay. What Trump released was not a verbatim transcript of that phone call.

 

[FLVOL_79]

No, it's a firsthand account. Whether or not it's accurate, can be debated but he isn't relying on the memory of others. It isn't hearsay. What Trump released was not a verbatim transcript of that phone call.

So its eyewitness testimony from memory that relies on inference..with everything else being hearsay. Gotcha.

 

[hog88]

Don't know yet but whatever it was, it's a firsthand account.

LOL

So if he said he didn't hear a quid pro quo but just disagreed with the POTUS we can drop this BS?

 

[VolnJC]

Its still hearsay. Unless he can hand over a copy of the audio recording its hearsay. While the phone call was retarded, Trump "got ahead of it" by releasing a transcript. Its the only real hard evidence...hell..maybe the only tangible evidence at this point. Who knows though.

It's as if they were saying that Trump and Zekensky sat down and drafted the transcript..no one has testified that it is not correct or is incomplete...it's one thing if you don't like the President's policy decisions it's quite another to accuse him of forging or manipulating a form. Only FBI agents who dislike Trump are capable of that level of crime. *Cough Page and Strzok cough*

 

[BowlBrother85]

LOL

So if he said he didn't hear a quid pro quo but just disagreed with the POTUS we can drop this BS?

No, it's not all about an alleged quid-pro-quo. It is a violation of federal campaign finance laws to solicit a foreign government for "something of value" to a political campaign. Two central figures in this scandal have been arrested. Rudy Giuliani is under criminal investigation. The quid-pro-quo is probably the most serious accusation, but it's not the whole thing.