The Impeachment Thread

#19,276
#19,276
Vol737 said:
Does everyone recognize that this will not be exclusive to Trump? The Dems are showing us that going forward, they will attempt to manufacture, fabricate and spin “evidence” against any sitting republican president in an effort to impeach and remove from office. These fake trials and proceedings will be constant and standard fare. They’re writing, amending and perfecting the playbook with this trial run. Convince me I’m wrong.
Click to expand...
💯 Correct!

They won't just go after Republican Presidents but anyone nominated by a Republican President. We've already seen it with the Kavanaugh nomination, etc...
 
  • Like
Reactions: BreatheUT and W.TN.Orange Blood
#19,277
#19,277
volfanhill said:
The silence, or deflection, on the Trump foundation theft from Vets is appalling to me. I give nursevol credit. She’s a trump fan is unhappy about it. But the rest of the merry band wants to ignore it or deflect to Hillary. The vast majority knows she’s a scum bag. They just can’t admit he is too. Probably like all of those Hillary says are “urging her” to run. Blind allegiance to a d-bag.
Click to expand...
Yeah I think that’s one of the more scumbaggy things he’s done and the fact that it’s sliding under the radar is probably the best argument in favor of some of the Trump hysteria being problematic.

I do think there’s just an unwillingness to accept any criticism at this point but there’s also just fatigue for a lot of people.

That said, due to how I was raised, the pushback against secularism has always been one of the reasons I identified as conservative. Maybe that’s ironic from a lawyer, but I think that’s true for a lot of people.

One of the things that bewilders me most about this forum is watching people from the party that used to be a bulwark against secularism choose a figurehead that has to be defended with legal technicalities that they didn’t even believe in 3 years ago, and outsource their morality to members of Congress who they all know are corrupt.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Rifleman
#19,280
#19,280
luthervol said:
Read carefully. I said president or politician.
Plus - a once in every 300 year catastrophe doesn't mean the catastrophe will happen every 300 years; it means it will happen about 5 times every 1500 years or so.
But yes, time does fly.
Click to expand...

You really think Andrew Johnson and Andrew Jackson were better Presidents than Trump?

Whether you like Trump or not, there have been some really sucky politicians since the beginning of the us.
 
  • Like
Reactions: W.TN.Orange Blood
#19,282
#19,282
SpaceCoastVol said:
Sorry you can't live in reality. It's really too bad that you want government controlling your life.
Click to expand...

I am unfortunately one of the few in this thread living in reality. You are living in some delusional world where apparently all you do is watch Fox news all day and you think everything the president is doing is completely normal and professional. I don't want government controlling my life but what I do want is a clown who has no business being in the White House gone.
 
  • Like
Reactions: samanderson and tvolsfan
#19,283
#19,283
Coug said:
I am unfortunately one of the few in this thread living in reality. You are living in some delusional world where apparently all you do is watch Fox news all day and you think everything the president is doing is completely normal and professional. I don't want government controlling my life but what I do want is a clown who has no business being in the White House gone.
Click to expand...
He won the election. Elections have consequences or so your boy said once. Deal with it. It is gonna be a great ride for another 5 years.
 
#19,286
#19,286
During Friday's public hearings, Yovanovitch told Stewart, a Utah Republican on the House Intelligence Committee, that she could supply the panel with no information regarding criminal activity or bribes that President Trump may have been involved with.

Stewart: "I would now feel compelled to ask you, Madam Ambassador, as you sit here before us, very simply and directly, do you have any information regarding the president of the United States accepting any bribes?"

Yovanovitch: "No."

Stewart: "Do you have any information regarding any criminal activity that the president of the United States has been involved with at all?"

Yovanovitch: "No.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CagleMtnVol, hjeagle1vol, NorthDallas40 and 1 other person
#19,288
#19,288
Weezer said:
Where you lose the argument for me is that you put Trump outside that range of normal, but not Hillary. You seem to believe only your opinions matter. Only your perspective matters. You never admit to just how colored your own "continuum" is. You treat what you opine as fact when it is far from it.
Click to expand...
Ultimately, no one opinion really matters. It is the critical mass of opinions which matter. You can debate if Hitler was good or bad and rather that is fact or opinion. You can debate if George Washington was good or bad and rather that is fact or opinion. You can debate if famine, war, and penicillin are each good or bad and rather that is fact or opinion.
I believe famine is worse than penicillin, I believe that Hitler was worse than Washington, and I believe Trump is worse than the Clinton. I believe each of those with equal conviction. The ratio of fact to opinion is debatable but inconsequential.
You chose to normalize Trump and believe he is no worse than Clinton. I accept that but wholeheartedly disagree.
 
#19,290
#19,290
hjeagle1vol said:
No, sometimes you gotta dangle a carrot in front of a jackass to lead him along though.

View attachment 238689
Click to expand...
This gets me. The SOS office is responsible for embassy security and Stevens requested more security. The request didn't get the attention it should have. The whole Libya debacle was terrible.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BreatheUT, NorthDallas40 and VolnJC
#19,291
#19,291
RockyTop85 said:
Disingenuous much? You said there was “no evidence” (after you had admitted that was a bad faith argument). I told you, after you finally admitted that “no evidence” was completely inaccurate, that I didn’t fault you for not being convinced by the evidence that was there.

“No evidence” is a lie.
“Unpersuasice evidence,” like what @Weezer is saying, is a subjective statement.

And yes, I probably “hurled insults.” What are you, the PC police? I thought Donald Trump was supposed to end PC culture? You guys, still crying about being insulted days later, seem as soft as a fresh roll of charmin.
Click to expand...
Yeah, you wish you could upset me but you have absolutely no power to do so. I only thought it was funny because you were saying I was being childish in the same post. Irony, look it up. And you still haven’t figured out you are mixing up posters. I’ve never said anything about bad faith and certainly never admitted anything. You just like making assumptions and jumping to conclusions off those bad assumptions. Gee, where have we seen that before? Have a great day RT85 and lighten up Francis.
 
#19,292
#19,292
luthervol said:
It's the same with anyone and the president or politician they support.....
in a way.......
but once in every 300 years or so, you have an anomaly.
Trump is beyond the line of acceptability.
You can think of world leaders throughout history.
All were supported by some and hated by others.
They were not all equally deserving of that hate.
They were not all equally deserving of that love.
At least in hindsight, it's obvious which leaders were deserving of each. (many knew at the time)
Trump is and will be no different.
Click to expand...
And the way I see it, the nonstop attempts to remove Trump from office that began before he even took office are over the line of acceptability.
 
#19,294
#19,294
evillawyer said:
Where's. The. Beef.

Saying so don't make it so.
Click to expand...
How is it you can apply this thought process now but completely forget this line of thinking when these witnesses are claiming things with absolutely zero evidence? Simple. Because they are saying things you want to be true.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 37L1
#19,296
#19,296
Rifleman said:
So the entire questioning was outlining that Trump was leading an intimidation campaign against Yovanovitch. For Trump to then attack her in real time is the height of stupidity.
Click to expand...
I love how she can be tough on corruption but isn’t tough enough to handle a tweet.
 
#19,297
#19,297
MontyPython said:
Yes but it is also evident Trump did so without any rationale other than advancing his own personal interests. Does that help or hurt the US?
Click to expand...
Is it up to us to decide what’s best for the US or it that the job of the elected President? I’m not talking about elections, the country already decided Trump was better for the country than Hillary.
 
#19,299
#19,299
ETV said:
Hardly. I've tried to accept certain views from both sides while trying to be objective as a conservative. I don't fall in line with party politics as you may have done. Most will recognize this circus for what it is, a circus.

Thanks for clearing that up about metaphors. Apparently you didn't understand my response.
Click to expand...
I understand that you think Schiff treated republicans unfairly yesterday when they were purposely staging a clown show while being out of order. What other point were you trying to make? He's not letting her speak because Nunes is intentionally and knowingly violating House rules by yielding his time to her, knowing exactly what Schiff would do. It's not that complicated. Stop pushing any other narrative when you know it’s wrong.
 
Last edited:
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top