The Impeachment Thread

[MontyPython]

So, Deep State got to him?

+1. Cuban on the grassy knoll.

 

[UT_VOLS13]

So, Deep State got to him?

There is no "Deep State". My fellow VN members have told me so!

 

[Mick]

No, I said he should have told the truth the 1st time around. That does not mean I think his "ammended" testimony is the truth.

So he didn't tell the "truth" the 1st time but the "amended" testimony is the real deal or "truth"

Yes, your screeching was documented, but it was hard to track down an actual position.

 

[VolnJC]

Dang it I thought u guys had him this time!

 

[VolStrom]

Jokes on you, my guy wasn't elected.

Who do you have this time around?

 

[Hunerwadel]

So, Deep State got to him?

Either that or the Clinton machine.

 

[VolnJC]

Dang it x 2

 

[volfanjustin]

Dang it I thought u guys had him this time!

But Kyle griffin and maddow have told them different and they absolutely know more than Meadows

 

[Septic]

Compare what Trump has been able to achieve with a mature economy with what either Bernie or Warren will do. Hold on to your ass if a democrat gets elected because your but will be handed to you.

Both of them would destroy the economy and send the deficit (further) into the stratosphere. They are both terrifying from a fiscal perspective but without the pandering to the 'if it's free, it's for me crowd' they bring little to the table and they know it.

 

[n_huffhines]

 

[lawgator1]

Dang it x 2

Yup. Here it comes.

 

[VolnJC]

And then it all crumbles apart for the Dems again..u would think they would learn

 

[Stew Cook]

There is no "Deep State". My fellow VN members have told me so!

There is... Illuminati, Royalty and such. They love chaos and laugh at us puny mortals.

 

[BowlBrother85]

Under criminal law, yes. This is an inquiry into an impeachment. Trump doesn't have a right to know who is accusing him.

That is exactly right. This is not a criminal prosecution. The language of the 6th Amendment is very clear that it only applies to criminal prosecutions. I understand that Rand Paul is not an attorney, but I would expect anyone who is a United States Senator to know that. He cited the 6th Amendment, and he has to know better than this.

 

[W.TN.Orange Blood]

Both of them would destroy the economy and send the deficit (further) into the stratosphere. They are both terrifying from a fiscal perspective but without the pandering to the 'if it's free, it's for me crowd' they bring little to the table and they know it.

Second Best post coming from you this year.....Congrats. You're getting better w/the right brain cells.......

 

[UT_VOLS13]

Both of them would destroy the economy and send the deficit (further) into the stratosphere. They are both terrifying from a fiscal perspective but without the pandering to the 'if it's free, it's for me crowd' they bring little to the table and they know it.

Alright, who hacked Septic's VN account?

 

[lawgator1]

Trump: "Wait, what, there was a quid pro quo? I had no idea."

 

[Septic]

Dang it x 2

"I want nothing, I wan't no quid pro quo - I want him to do the right thing" - the dotard

LOL, I'd bet my house those words never crossed his lips. How would anyone with a brain reconcile that Donny would even know what "quid pro quo' meant prior to his attorney telling his to "stop doing it", let alone - use it a sentence.

 

[VolStrom]

View attachment 236192

So what's the problem?

 

[newyorkvol]

This is why the whole thing is screwed up. Everything is done to bolster a viewpoint, and not to actually get to the truth. Selecting portions of testimony to release, getting amended statements, and transcripts of some but not all as well as denying the “accused” to cross examine or call witnesses without the oppositions approval....it all stinks.

There’s no doubt in my mind that this happened. But there’s also no doubt in my mind that all politicians at this level are corrupt. My suspicion is that we’re finally getting a glimpse of whats been going on forever behind the curtains because people just want him gone.

 

[BowlBrother85]

Both of them would destroy the economy and send the deficit (further) into the stratosphere. They are both terrifying from a fiscal perspective but without the pandering to the 'if it's free, it's for me crowd' they bring little to the table and they know it.

I agree... but I do think that Joe Biden will be the party nominee. He is a career politician, which I don't like... and he has an inconsistent voting record. He voted for the Iraq War, which would usually be a non-starter with me. His messaging has been all over the place, similar to John Kerry, but the bottom line is that he can win. I think he will.

 

[37L1]

I apologize, I'm simply too stunned to believe that you couldn't figure it out on your own... Goodness, go back and read it again and let me know what you think?

I'll even highlight the important bits for you.

I think you prefer even more words instead of yes or no. I even highlighted the important bits for you. You allergic to them? If so, you can just cut and paste.

This is a fun game you play.

 

[lawgator1]

This is why the whole thing is screwed up. Everything is done to bolster a viewpoint, and not to actually get to the truth. Selecting portions of testimony to release, getting amended statements, and transcripts of some but not all as well as denying the “accused” to cross examine or call witnesses without the oppositions approval....it all stinks.

There’s no doubt in my mind that this happened. But there’s also no doubt in my mind that all politicians at this level are corrupt. My suspicion is that we’re finally getting a glimpse of whats been going on forever behind the curtains because people just want him gone.

Fair enough.

But does not excuse Trump.

 

[VolnJC]

And from the top rope the quid pro quo Killa

 

[Septic]

Who do you have this time around?

I started to do the weigh my choices and....