The Impeachment Thread

[1972 Grad]

Haha. New York Law School. The place you go when no other law school in NYC will give you the time of day.

Where did you teach law?

 

[volfanjustin]

A principled conservative. More than I can say for most here.

no, a whiny little attention whore

 

[NorthDallas40]

So does Trump leg-humping make you go blind?

Gotta get rid of the blue balls some how

Keep on selling this “scandal” though girl. Please. Pretty please? ?



Edit: on second thought I think “I’ll take Trump leg humping over Cankles crotch sniffing 10 out of 10 times” would have been a better retort

 

[Mick]

Nope. I copy and pasted the actual Mueller report specifically for you dullards to try and digest. It seems reading comprehension is not yalls forte..

Apparently copy and pasting is not yours.

 

[SpaceCoastVol]

How absurd will the "transcript" of the call be when released? I wonder if it'll be replete with sharpie deletions and additions.

And there it is.... ALREADY making excuses for the next crisis.

 

[AirVol]

I guess the Dumbs will go back to the Kavanaugh impeachment dreams.

 

[0nelilreb]

Laugh all you want but if impeached and a majority of the Senate vote to convict, that's just too ugly. The GOP establishment, which has been looking for a way to get off the Trump merry-go-round for four years, may have finally found a way out.

“ IF “ ( as my dad use to say ) a frog had wings , he wouldn’t bump his butt every time he jumped . I think there’s a lot of projecting and wishful thinking in your post . The dems will be taking a huge chance if they proceed to impeachment without a verified smoking gun . I do mean verified , without a shadow of a doubt not just with feels and hopes .

 

[MontyPython]

At first blush, I see nothing in the "transcript" (if complete and not edited) that justifies impeachment at this time. Unethical? Yes. Impeachment-worthy? No.

However, it's equally - if not more important - that the full whistleblower complaint be made available to Congress. Should Trump bar this, then the whistleblower should testify before Congress - behind closed doors, if necessary, for classified briefing / QA.

One other important tidbit... Pelosi is nobody's fool. I highly doubt that she would put herself out on the impeachment limb haphazardly. Translation: She's probably already met with the whistleblower, and knows the full extent of the situation. If that's the case, Trump is toast.

 

[SpaceCoastVol]

They ain’t too smart.

Pelosi calls for impeachment before they read the transcript and hold a vote. She almost lost her dentures when she was yacking.

She's the democrat version of Mark Richt. Lost control of her party.

 

[UT_VOLS13]

Where did you teach law?

VolNaton U

 

[Mick]

The only way out of this is to make Giuliani Ambassador to the Ukraine.

 

[SpaceCoastVol]

Genius himself right into an impeachment inquire.

 

[SpaceCoastVol]

Do you remember the Nixon impeachment?

Cheeses man.... Seriously?


Do you?


bwaaaaa haaaaaaa haaaaaaa

 

[SpaceCoastVol]

No...….because Nixon wasn't impeached.

 

[1972 Grad]

At first blush, I see nothing in the "transcript" (if complete and not edited) that justifies impeachment at this time. Unethical? Yes. Impeachment-worthy? No.

However, it's equally - if not more important - that the full whistleblower complaint be made available to Congress. Should Trump bar this, then the whistleblower should testify before Congress - behind closed doors, if necessary, for classified briefing / QA.

One other important tidbit... Pelosi is nobody's fool. I highly doubt that she would put herself out on the impeachment limb haphazardly. Translation: She's probably already met with the whistleblower, and knows the full extent of the situation. If that's the case, Trump is toast.

YGHN!

 

[roosterjbh]

Lol

 

[SpaceCoastVol]

And in the minds of people around the world, clearly reflected in numerous polls I’m sure you’ll ignore.

Then why are American embassies all over the world inundated with people trying to come here? The lines literally go around the block.

 

[Septic]

Who is a President supposed to hire? People with no experience? They all hire insiders.

You're undermining your own argument. Perhaps don't thump your chest about him draining the swamp while conceding he's simultaneously filling it up.

 

[MontyPython]

Someone help me understand this:

Trump tells Ukraine Prez that his personal lawyer, Guiliani, and Barr will be his points of contact. Why? Why in the world would/could/should Rudy be involved in anything involving Ukraine? Why would Trump substitute his own attorney - paid solely by Trump - for the 'normal' State Department employees, attorneys,etc. that normally handle such things?

 

[Septic]

Also graduated Magna Cum Laude in Political Science, and got his Law degree from California Hastings Law School. He taught Law at New York Law School, but he is unqualified, unlike our forum posters.

I'm going to need to see his transcripts.

 

[carlos86]

 

[Hunerwadel]

At first blush, I see nothing in the "transcript" (if complete and not edited) that justifies impeachment at this time. Unethical? Yes. Impeachment-worthy? No.

However, it's equally - if not more important - that the full whistleblower complaint be made available to Congress. Should Trump bar this, then the whistleblower should testify before Congress - behind closed doors, if necessary, for classified briefing / QA.

One other important tidbit... Pelosi is nobody's fool. I highly doubt that she would put herself out on the impeachment limb haphazardly. Translation: She's probably already met with the whistleblower, and knows the full extent of the situation. If that's the case, Trump is toast.

The incomplete transcript sounds like a shakedown to me. I have to wonder what isn't being shown.

 

[Septic]

At first blush, I see nothing in the "transcript" (if complete and not edited) that justifies impeachment at this time. Unethical? Yes. Impeachment-worthy? No.

However, it's equally - if not more important - that the full whistleblower complaint be made available to Congress. Should Trump bar this, then the whistleblower should testify before Congress - behind closed doors, if necessary, for classified briefing / QA.

One other important tidbit... Pelosi is nobody's fool. I highly doubt that she would put herself out on the impeachment limb haphazardly. Translation: She's probably already met with the whistleblower, and knows the full extent of the situation. If that's the case, Trump is toast.

I agree, if the transcript begins and ends here - this isn't just a black eye for the democrats, it's a colossal failure that should tarnish every allegation that is levied from now until eternity.

 

[1972 Grad]

You're undermining your own argument. Perhaps don't thump your chest about him draining the swamp while conceding he's simultaneously filling it up.

He is trying to drain the swamp of unelected political hacks in the FBI and DOJ that attempted a coup. I never said that he was going to get rid of every person that ever worked in government or had conflicts outside of government. That's not possible

 

[1972 Grad]

I agree, if the transcript begins and ends here - this isn't just a black eye for the democrats, it's a colossal failure that should tarnish every allegation that is levied from now until eternity.

That has already happened before this.