Impeachment

Joe Fan said:
If allowed to gain full political, legal and military control, they will send us all to the Gulag. Or worse. History repeats.
Click to expand...

Not gonna say I told ya, but I told ya
Not just a Bernie Bro but actually inside the organization
Can you guess what they want to do with you if they win?
Can you guess what they want to do if they dont win?

More videos coming

 
Last edited:
Gulags paid people a living wage? This guy is a willful moron.

From Russian sources I have heard descriptions of gulags that will chill your blood. There was no re-education going on. You built a road or rail road in Siberia until you either worked to death or froze to death. They didn't even have fences. You could sneak away if you really wanted to, but you would die out in the wilderness still hundreds of miles from any civilization. Some people made it out, granted. But not many.

The other part of it was that if you were from organized crime you received preferential treatment sometimes from the Soviets in order to get you to enforce rules or bring some kind of order. If you were a political prisoner, always to a Soviet, a "fascist, you were at the bottom of the pecking order.
 
Monahorns said:
Gulags paid people a living wage? This guy is a willful moron.

From Russian sources I have heard descriptions of gulags that will chill your blood. There was no re-education going on. You built a road or rail road in Siberia until you either worked to death or froze to death. They didn't even have fences. You could sneak away if you really wanted to, but you would die out in the wilderness still hundreds of miles from any civilization. Some people made it out, granted. But not many.

The other part of it was that if you were from organized crime you received preferential treatment sometimes from the Soviets in order to get you to enforce rules or bring some kind of order. If you were a political prisoner, always to a Soviet, a "fascist, you were at the bottom of the pecking order.
Click to expand...

I think Stalin killed close to 2M people in the Gulags. Ive also read the Nazis used his Gulag ideas to base their own concentration camps on
 
McConnell now saying they may subpoena Hunter Biden to testify. I cant tell if this is real or simply a tactic to pressure Dems into something. But, if so, then some Senators may have to recuse themselves as Hunter gave some of them a part of his Ukraine/China income.

Besides the pure entertainment value, there is a lot more going on here. From my perspective, you cant put on a witness, whether its Hunter Biden or John Bolton, without first deposing him. Even lawyers who never did trial work know this. Probably many non-lawyers know this too. This goes for any potential witness. And this goes for both sides. This is not how trials are run. At least not civil trials.

Which makes me think this is just a tactic. I doubt anyone in the Senate really wants Hunter Biden to answer questions. Because once that starts, it might get very uncomfortable for many of them. For just one example and I sort of hate to write it, but filings show McConnell himself is now worth somewhere around $24M. I think he came in with around $200k in assets. It would be nice if they did things properly, but self-interest will control the behavior of many of them. All that said, if Hunter does actually take the stand, it will be worth tuning in.

McConnell opens door for Hunter Biden testimony at Trump trial
 
I think Stalin killed close to 2M people in the Gulags. Ive also read the Nazis used his Gulag ideas to base their own concentration camps on
Click to expand...

Historically concentration camps were first used (according to my knowledge) by Spain against Cuba. Then the US used it against them against Native Americans and called them concentration camps. We also used them against Filipinos just after the Spanish American war. Germany and Russia learned directly from us and probably other colonial empires. Russia just didn't use fences. They used geographical isolation. All the same concept basically.

One of the main differences between the US and Spain was that these 2 planned on keeping the people in the camps alive until the war was over. Germany and Russia didn't care as much about keeping people alive.
 
Sangre Naranjada said:
Here is some history for you.
Recall back to 9-11-2001. Once the shock of events wore off and the swamp got back to being the swamp, can you remember what primary criticism the Democrats had of Bush's administration? They didn't exactly blame him for 9-11, but they faulted him for not connecting the dots. They claimed we had the intelligence (which we did, but at the time the various agencies were prevented from sharing their intelligence across agency lines) and had the Bush administration acted proactively on that intelligence we may have been able to avoid 9-11 altogether.

Fast forward to today, and what the Democrats are mewling about. Now they are claiming Trump may have committed war crimes because he did act proactively on the intelligence available to him.

As usual with the left, they don't argue anything based on principle. It is nothing more than using whatever argument is likely to score some political points. You see the same thing with the impeachment arguments when they said one thing about impeaching Slick Willie, and took the exact opposite stance when it came to impeaching Trump. No principles, just pure partisan hackery. Keep it up Dems. More and more people have been awakened to your tactics, and more and more of them are repulsed.
Click to expand...
I blamed Clinton for 9-11 much more than W. But I also blame Ken Starr and his enablers. I mean thank the Dark Lord that we tracked down that blue dress instead of the Cole bombing plotters.
 
Last edited:
That's nice, Barry. My post was a criticism of the obvious hypocrisy moral bankruptcy of Dems in Washington, the political class.

Not of you or other rank and file types whose choice of who to blame isn't based solely on what may help consolidate power in the next election.
 
Here is another one with the Bernie Campaign Bro -- this time using the Cuban analogy on how to control American dissenters,
"They shot them on the beach!"​

 
Monahorns said:
Historically concentration camps were first used (according to my knowledge) by Spain against Cuba. Then the US used it against them against Native Americans and called them concentration camps. We also used them against Filipinos just after the Spanish American war. Germany and Russia learned directly from us and probably other colonial empires. Russia just didn't use fences. They used geographical isolation. All the same concept basically.

One of the main differences between the US and Spain was that these 2 planned on keeping the people in the camps alive until the war was over. Germany and Russia didn't care as much about keeping people alive.
Click to expand...

Hitler & Co modeled theirs off Stalin's. They were going for efficiency
 
Monahorns said:
Germany and Russia learned directly from us and probably other colonial empires.
Click to expand...

Joe Fan said:
Hitler & Co modeled theirs off Stalin's. They were going for efficiency
Click to expand...

The idea of using secured camps to confine people is nothing new. The US didn't invent that. Neither did the Soviet Union. The use of camps also isn't what made the Nazis bad. What made them bad is that they used the camps to imprison citizens because of their religion, ethnicity, and political beliefs (as opposed to just violent criminals or POWs) and of course, because of the conditions and treatment of inmates.

Of course, people often confuse the concentration camps with the extermination camps, which is where the really horrific stuff happened. And those truly were a Nazi invention. Even the Soviets didn't do that. When they wanted to kill somebody, they had the decency and common courtesy to shoot them or starve them to death rather than sending them to a camp and gassing them.
 
OUBubba said:
I blamed Clinton for 9-11 much more than W. But I also blame Ken Starr and his enablers. I mean thank the Dark Lord that we tracked down that blue dress instead of the Cole bombing plotters.
Click to expand...

Barry, this is idiocy. It wasn't Ken Starr's job to track down the Cole bombing plotters anymore than it was your job to track them down. It was his job to track down the blue dress.

Of course, you could blame the guy who made the blue dress important and then committed a felony to cover up its importance. But we don't do that in politics. We blame the people who catch the bad apple rather than the bad apple.
 
Joe Fan said:
McConnell now saying they may subpoena Hunter Biden to testify. I cant tell if this is real or simply a tactic to pressure Dems into something. But, if so, then some Senators may have to recuse themselves as Hunter gave some of them a part of his Ukraine/China income....
Click to expand...

Based on the debates, I would not stop with my recusal demands at those tainted by Hunter Biden's dirty money.

Based on what they've just said, I would argue it is impossible for Amy Klobuchar, Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren to be unbiased jurors. And I would throw in Michael Bennet, Cory Booker and Kamala Harris too for recent similar statements. Allowing them to remain on "the jury" would the equivalent of letting the prosecutor sit on the jury. If they are allowed do remain, they will be sitting in judgment of their specific political opponent for that same political cycle. This is a ridiculous situation. Republicans should make a big deal of this, take the time to explain it, and force Roberts to make a ruling on this. (In real life, probably all 100 of them would be excused as jurors)
 
Mr. Deez said:
The idea of using secured camps to confine people is nothing new. The US didn't invent that. Neither did the Soviet Union. T....
Click to expand...

While I dont disagree with that, you and the other poster keep seeking to move the goalposts so that you can find something to disagree with. The original factual claim was that Hitler and his people modeled their original camp plans on Stalin's Gulags. Which is what I actually wrote and which is still true. You guys going from there to Native Americans is pretty far off the reservation, in my opinion at least. But please, carry on.
 
Mr. Deez said:
Barry, this is idiocy. It wasn't Ken Starr's job to track down the Cole bombing plotters anymore than it was your job to track them down. It was his job to track down the blue dress.

Of course, you could blame the guy who made the blue dress important and then committed a felony to cover up its importance. But we don't do that in politics. We blame the people who catch the bad apple rather than the bad apple.
Click to expand...
I blame Clinton. I think he did a lot of good things but pissed it all away by the bad things.
 
Mr. Deez said:
Then why bust Ken Starr's balls for doing his job?
Click to expand...

In hind-site (a conclusion I arrived years ago) I thought it was a mistake by the Republicans to go after Clinton for this. It was my feeling that he did lie under oath and was incredibly reckless to do this with such a young woman. He is a Lothario and it distracted him from his duties. What if Hillary had divorced him? That would have been something. The mistake is the hypocrisy of many Republican men who have committed adultery. The mistake is the idea that Clinton may have lied because he didn't want his daughter to know. The mistake is that it was a process crime.

The whole thing was a huge display of emotional immaturity and that is why I don't like it when people act like Clinton is so smart. Maybe he is but I judge the entire human being. I don't cherry pick what I like and ignore the rest. I try not to judge but if you ask my opinion about people I don't leave relevant things off the table.

I also believe that the Republicans knew he was a liar far beyond Monica but were frustrated in their attempts to publicly pin anything on him. So they took what they had and ran with it.
 
UTChE96 said:
She is a caricature at this point.
Click to expand...

I think there are two main possibilities here. She's either delusional or an absolute Machiavellian. Her delusion would be the shock that the American people continue to support Trump over her brand of "good" politics. So it must be something that is being done to fool the idiots who vote for him. The Machiavellian angle is that she is so disciplined that she stays on point even with insiders. She is a method actor. She knows her platform is not resonating with moderates; only with socially maladjusted haters and white Liberals who want to be "good" people. So she sticks with the only thing that works: Trump is committing treason. McConnell is committing treason. That is the only way to get someone who believes abortion is murder to vote Democrat.
 
OUBubba said:
It's more his enablers. They spent 7 years on jack squat and gave Clinton something to focus on other than doing his job.
Click to expand...

You do understand that you sound exactly like Garmel and I35 when they say nobody should even be looking into Trump, right?
 
Mr. Deez said:
You do understand that you sound exactly like Garmel and I35 when they say nobody should even be looking into Trump, right?
Click to expand...
I'm not saying that they shouldn't have looked. They probably should have stopped at some point and just said, "there's something there but we can't prove it is big enough to warrant impeachment". Similar to Mueller. He spent a considerable less amount of time and congressional hearings than did Starr. Let's see if he rides off into the sunset to cover up football player raping/pillaging in the big 12 too.... :)
 
OUBubba said:
I'm not saying that they shouldn't have looked. They probably should have stopped at some point and just said, "there's something there but we can't prove it is big enough to warrant impeachment". Similar to Mueller. He spent a considerable less amount of time and congressional hearings than did Starr. Let's see if he rides off into the sunset to cover up football player raping/pillaging in the big 12 too.... :)
Click to expand...

Was perjury proven in the Clinton case?
 
OUBubba said:
I'm not saying that they shouldn't have looked. They probably should have stopped at some point and just said, "there's something there but we can't prove it is big enough to warrant impeachment". Similar to Mueller. He spent a considerable less amount of time and congressional hearings than did Starr. Let's see if he rides off into the sunset to cover up football player raping/pillaging in the big 12 too.... :)
Click to expand...

They did find a felony. How is that not big enough to at least consider for impeachment? Andrew Johnson and Trump were impeached for less.

Not similar to Mueller. He was only tasked with one investigation. Starr was at work longer, but there was more to investigate, because the Justice Department and a three-judge panel gave him more to do.
 
Mr. Deez said:
Yes.
Click to expand...

So this is the problem; how much judgment does upholding the Constitution allow? What is the wiggle room on a high crime or a misdemeanor? You've termed Clinton's transgression as being a felony. How can anyone choose not to pursue a felony? Telling the truth in a trial is paramount. You spoke about this at length in the past. It seems perjury is a joke to many people. It's not a joke to me. I think it should be vigorously pursued every time. It needs to be taken seriously.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Recent Threads

Back
Top