Impeachment

Mr. Deez said:
However, they chose to selectively leak information. That isn't per se against the law, but it undermines their credibility when they claim to be serious and solemn operators.
Click to expand...
Agree.
Third, they chose to launch an impeachment inquiry from the very beginning. There isn't some big legal implication of that. However, it is a major political move.
Click to expand...
They were kind of pushed to it because the GOP was clamoring for it, correct? I remember that they were wanting to look into the whistleblower complaint and the Jim Jordan's of the world were whining that there was no reason to do so. The impeachment investigation would give them cause to request things and people.
 
OUBubba said:
They were kind of pushed to it because the GOP was clamoring for it, correct? I remember that they were wanting to look into the whistleblower complaint and the Jim Jordan's of the world were whining that there was no reason to do so. The impeachment investigation would give them cause to request things and people.
Click to expand...

No, the GOP wasn't clamoring for it. I don't recall Jordan saying there was no reason to look. However, even if he did, he's not in charge. He's one member from the minority party. Democrats controlled the House, and they decided what to do and how to do it. They went with an impeachment inquiry, because the base demanded it. They had been demanding it for a long time. Nobody cared what Jim Jordan thought or said.
 
The GOP and Jim Jordan wanted to call their witnesses and shifty wouldn’t let them. The dems controlled everything they didn’t do anything the GOP wanted.
 
Mr. Deez said:
No, the GOP wasn't clamoring for it. I don't recall Jordan saying there was no reason to look. However, even if he did, he's not in charge. He's one member from the minority party. Democrats controlled the House, and they decided what to do and how to do it. They went with an impeachment inquiry, because the base demanded it. They had been demanding it for a long time. Nobody cared what Jim Jordan thought or said.
Click to expand...
Some time prior to the announcement of an impeachment inquiry there was some level of almost goading from the GOP house that it was wrong to do investigations in the absence of an actual impeachment investigation. Maybe I'm wrong. Also, Gym Jordan is my "go to" reference for a generic GOP house member.
 
humahuma said:
The GOP and Jim Jordan wanted to call their witnesses and shifty wouldn’t let them. The dems controlled everything they didn’t do anything the GOP wanted.
Click to expand...
Yes, in about page 20 here we discussed that the Judiciary Committee served as the prosecutor and the House served as the grand jury. The senate was the jury.
 
OUBubba said:
Some time prior to the announcement of an impeachment inquiry there was some level of almost goading from the GOP house that it was wrong to do investigations in the absence of an actual impeachment investigation. Maybe I'm wrong. Also, Gym Jordan is my "go to" reference for a generic GOP house member.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I don't think that's right. Keep in mind that Congress does investigations all the time without impeachment inquiries. The GOP did it. Democrats do it. It's as old as the republic, and it's the norm.
 
Mr. Deez said:
Yeah, I don't think that's right. Keep in mind that Congress does investigations all the time without impeachment inquiries. The GOP did it. Democrats do it. It's as old as the republic, and it's the norm.
Click to expand...
I've been told that I was wrong probably more than 200 times in this 121 page thread. This is the one that I concur with the most.
 
In 2016, the dems ramrodded a terrible candidate up against a very beatable Trump. In 2020, they are choosing to ramrod Trump back into office with this charade. Unless the economy falters, Trump will win in a landslide.
 
theiioftx said:
In 2016, the dems ramrodded a terrible candidate up against a very beatable Trump. In 2020, they are choosing to ramrod Trump back into office with this charade. Unless the economy falters, Trump will win in a landslide.
Click to expand...

We're too polarized for anyone to win in a landslide. However, I think this matter ultimately helps Trump in two ways. First, the Democrats did a crappy job and will obviously fail. The vote was their pinnacle. It's all downhill from here. And frankly, it wouldn't surprise me if some Democratic senators (Doug Jones, Joe Manchin, and perhaps Kirsten Synema) vote to acquit if the matter ever gets to them.

Second, the impeachment process damaged Joe Biden more than anything Ukraine could have done to him. The reason why is that Joe Biden was largely considered at least by many to be a decent guy before this. Now he looks like a sleazy guy.

So instead of 2020 being "Good Old Joe v. Sleazy Trump," it is now "Sleazy Joe v. Sleazy Trump."
 
HRC has had extensive work done on her face and eyes in an effort to look younger. (It didn't work) She has also been seen shopping with a professional shopper for suits and such.
I am not counting out a Hillary surprise at the last minute.
 
Mr. Deez said:
We're too polarized for anyone to win in a landslide. However, I think this matter ultimately helps Trump in two ways. First, the Democrats did a crappy job and will obviously fail. The vote was their pinnacle. It's all downhill from here. And frankly, it wouldn't surprise me if some Democratic senators (Doug Jones, Joe Manchin, and perhaps Kirsten Synema) vote to acquit if the matter ever gets to them.

Second, the impeachment process damaged Joe Biden more than anything Ukraine could have done to him. The reason why is that Joe Biden was largely considered at least by many to be a decent guy before this. Now he looks like a sleazy guy.

So instead of 2020 being "Good Old Joe v. Sleazy Trump," it is now "Sleazy Joe v. Sleazy Trump."
Click to expand...
There is no good Dem candidate. I dont get it.
 
OUBubba said:
There is no good Dem candidate. I dont get it.
Click to expand...

I don't think that's true. I think Pete Buttigieg, Cory Booker, and Amy Klobuchar are decent candidates. The problem is that the candidates esteemed by the crackpot base (Warren and Sanders) and the "establishment" candidate (Biden) aren't very good.
 
Mr. Deez said:
I think Pete Buttigieg, Cory Booker, and Amy Klobuchar are decent candidates.
Click to expand...

in good lawyer style ... I'd need a proposed definition of a "good candidate" to 'amen' this one.

I do not consider Booker nor Klobuchar "good candidates." And political philosophy prevents anything resembling an endorsement of "good" for Buttigeg ... just another excessive Fed leftist.
 
Mr. Deez said:
I don't think that's true. I think Pete Buttigieg, Cory Booker, and Amy Klobuchar are decent candidates. The problem is that the candidates esteemed by the crackpot base (Warren and Sanders) and the "establishment" candidate (Biden) aren't very good.
Click to expand...

What was your opinion on Booker's quick trigger finger in support of Jussie? Is that just something that is the new normal from an African-American and not an indication of their governing bias?
 
Mr. Deez said:
We're too polarized for anyone to win in a landslide. However, I think this matter ultimately helps Trump in two ways. First, the Democrats did a crappy job and will obviously fail. The vote was their pinnacle. It's all downhill from here. And frankly, it wouldn't surprise me if some Democratic senators (Doug Jones, Joe Manchin, and perhaps Kirsten Synema) vote to acquit if the matter ever gets to them.

Second, the impeachment process damaged Joe Biden more than anything Ukraine could have done to him. The reason why is that Joe Biden was largely considered at least by many to be a decent guy before this. Now he looks like a sleazy guy.

So instead of 2020 being "Good Old Joe v. Sleazy Trump," it is now "Sleazy Joe v. Sleazy Trump."
Click to expand...
Deez, it was always “sleazy dem” vs Trump. It took you about 3.5 years to reach what I figured out in June 2016.
 
mchammer said:
Deez, it was always “sleazy dem” vs Trump. It took you about 3.5 years to reach what I figured out in June 2016.
Click to expand...

I have been and continue to roll with the above until proven otherwise. Biden could have been the vehicle to challenge my mindset, but that is no longer the case knowing the Biden’s are crooked (lower case vs upper case Crooked for the Clinton’s).
 
horninchicago said:
I don't believe the media, Dem, and fired people's versions of his behavior.
Click to expand...

I don't either but much of the stuff he does is in plain sight. He's childish, untruthful, and his personal shots on others are not acceptable behavior and he needs to stop. However, even with all of this he's still the best president we've had in my lifetime.
 
Garmel said:
I don't either but much of the stuff he does is in plain sight. He's childish, untruthful, and his personal shots on others are not acceptable behavior and he needs to stop. However, even with all of this he's still the best president we've had in my lifetime.
Click to expand...
I still believe he does it to troll the media and libs. They go berserk when he does that and would go berserk if he didn't do it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Recent Threads

Back
Top