Impeachment

Seattle Husker said:
Not even discussing behind the scenes. I'm standing next to you pointing at the elephant on your chest. These are public quotes DIRECTLY from Trump and you're trying to tell me they don't exist. He didn't say that. A coach once told me "you can wish in one hand and **** in the other and see whatever gets filled first." That's applicable to your hope that Trump didn't brring up Biden when he's already admitted publicly he did.
Click to expand...

Show me where it says anything about an investigation. It doesn't. There isn't one word about an investigation anywhere there. They talk about Biden's corruption but nothing about telling Ukraine to investigate. Trying to move the goalposts again, huh? I never said that Trump didn't mention Biden. You fell for fake news again and you don't have the cajones to admit to it.
 
Seattle Husker said:
And it starts. Character assassination to protect the POTUS. You beat mchammer to the punch!

And some of y'all wonder why Trump did this stupid **** only a few days after Mueller testified. He has an army of apologists waiting to follow him off a cliff only to claim HRC pushed 'em all on the way down.

This defense mechanism has a name. Its called the firehose of falsehood.
Click to expand...

You're slowly losing it. TDS is a terrible thing.
 
Seattle Husker said:
And it starts. Character assassination to protect the POTUS. You beat mchammer to the punch!

And some of y'all wonder why Trump did this stupid **** only a few days after Mueller testified. He has an army of apologists waiting to follow him off a cliff only to claim HRC pushed 'em all on the way down.

This defense mechanism has a name. Its called the firehose of falsehood.
Click to expand...
Funny you think any of them have character.
 
Garmel said:
Show me where it says anything about an investigation. It doesn't. There isn't one word about an investigation anywhere there. They talk about Biden's corruption but nothing about telling Ukraine to investigate. Trying to move the goalposts again, huh? I never said that Trump didn't mention Biden. You fell for fake news again and you don't have the cajones to admit to it.
Click to expand...

I show you Trump holding the gun and threatening a victim and you want evidence of him firing it? How many times has Trump or Guiliani said publicly Biden should be investigated? Maybe you think Trump was philosophically pondering corruption and used Biden and son in an analogy? I'm trying to understand the angle because claiming he didn't admit to using the word "investigation" came from left field...of a different ballpark.
 
Seattle Husker said:
In the FoxNews article LH posted was this quote:

Can you explain Guiliani's logic that pushing Ukraine to investigate Hunter Biden is defending Trump? I'm clearly not seeing the logic unless you say he was defending Trump's reelection chances.
Click to expand...

No, I can't explain his logic without more information about what he was actually doing. "Defending my client" can mean a lot of things good or bad. The questioner should have pressed him on that.

Frankly, I'm skeptical of any justification of him being in Ukraine. He's not a diplomat, so there's no official reason for him to go. Is Trump part of some investigation or proceeding in Ukraine? If so, that would justify his presence, but I'm not aware of that being the case. It seems weird, and frankly, after getting out of the Russia investigation on mostly favorable terms, I would have stayed miles away from foreign governments other than for official business.
 
Both of you are jumping to conclusions. At a minimum, wait for the transcript of the call. Find out what was actually said before assuming anything.
 
An even more recent Quinnipiac poll (note: Q-poll almost always are biased against Trump). It shows that, even after this latest Ukraine stuff, a clear majority of voters do not want impeachment, especially college-educated whites who are the group Democrats are counting on to win in 2020

Do you think Trump should be impeached (yes/no)

Overall: 37/57
GOP: 4/95
Indies: 34/58
Dems: 21/73
Men: 32/64
Women: 43/51
White College: 36/61
18-34: 40/50
35-49: 36/60
50-64: 40/57
65+: 37/59
White Women: 33/61
Whites: 30/65
Blacks: 68/23
Hispanics: 52/45

QU Poll Release Detail​
 
Last edited:
These people who hold themselves out at "experts" (they define their site as for “those who are strongly interested in politics”) clearly have no idea what the Constitutional procedure is for removing a president. They do not know how it works or how many votes they will need.

 
Mr. Deez said:
Both of you are jumping to conclusions. At a minimum, wait for the transcript of the call. Find out what was actually said before assuming anything.
Click to expand...

Why should they? The Congressional Dems launched their inquiry knowing the same amount of facts?

It was clear that the Dems would impeach since they took the House in 2018. Pelosi was just waiting until closer to the 2020 election for maximum impact.
 
Clean said:
Why should they? The Congressional Dems launched their inquiry knowing the same amount of facts?

It was clear that the Dems would impeach since they took the House in 2018. Pelosi was just waiting until closer to the 2020 election for maximum impact.
Click to expand...

My five year old son picks his nose and occasionally wets his bed. Does that mean I should start picking my nose and taking a piss in my bed?

See where I'm going with this?
 
Mr. Deez said:
My five year old son picks his nose and occasionally wets his bed. Does that mean I should start picking my nose and taking a piss in my bed?

See where I'm going with this?
Click to expand...
But, this is neither a court of law nor a Congressional Committee. It's a message board. People draw initial conclusions and go from there.

And, as the results of the election, Mueller report, etc., all show, facts don't matter. People will believe what they want. Once this turns out to be yet another nothinburger, the media and left will not move on from it and finally let Trump do his job.
 
horninchicago said:
But, this is neither a court of law nor a Congressional Committee. It's a message board. People draw initial conclusions and go from there.

And, as the results of the election, Mueller report, etc., all show, facts don't matter. People will believe what they want. Once this turns out to be yet another nothinburger, the media and left will not move on from it and finally let Trump do his job.
Click to expand...

Waiting for the facts isn't a good idea just because one's in court or in a congressional committee. It's a good idea because not doing so makes us ignorant and less accepting of facts when they are known.
 
Mr. Deez said:
Waiting for the facts isn't a good idea just because one's in court or in a congressional committee. It's a good idea because not doing so makes us ignorant and less accepting of facts when they are known.
Click to expand...
I didn't say it isn't a good idea. Just saying the average American decided long ago what side he stands on and nothing will change his mind. Just like the Mueller report and electoral college results haven't convinced one side that Trump should be allowed to do his job.

Ford/Chevy, Longhorns/Sooners/Aggies, Pro-gun/Anti-gun, Republican/Democrat, etc, etc.
 
What is wrong with Ukraine investigating the incident with VP Biden and his threat the withhold billions of dollars if that person investigating the deal with Biden's son?
 
Horn6721 said:
What is wrong with Ukraine investigating the incident with VP Biden and his threat the withhold billions of dollars if that person investigating the deal with Biden's son?
Click to expand...
Good question. I read it is a felony. Sounds similar to the Feds threatening to withhold Federal funds from states if they don't do certain things. Is that a felony as well?
 
It seems to me ( and admit I know nothing about foreign affairs except the time spent with a cute Spaniard)
but wouldn't both countries want to investigate? And isn't it natural to discuss it with the head of the other country?
 
Horn6721 said:
What is wrong with Ukraine investigating the incident with VP Biden and his threat the withhold billions of dollars if that person investigating the deal with Biden's son?
Click to expand...

Um...it's a federal crime? A violation of our election laws, just for starters.

I'm waiting for the Whistleblower report but this transcript might be worse than I anticipated. He's roped Barr and Guiliani (not part of the government) into this ordeal. The threat against the former ambassador ("She's going to go through some things.") is also an abhorrent sideshow.
 
Last edited:
mchammer said:
According to Kim Strassel of WSJ, it’s another nothing burger. What a waste of my time to post the original post here. Should have known better. But it did confirm that SH has a serious case of TDS.

WSJ Journo Shreds 'Attempt To Take Out A President' After Transcript Release
Click to expand...

Wait...a Conservative journalist on the Editorial Board of the WSJ doesn't think this ordeal is important? :yikes:

As I've said previously, we each have TDS, although the acronym has a different definition. While I'd like to see the POTUS be held accountable, you clearly have the opposite intention.

Is anyone concerned that Trump apparently sees Barr and the Justice Department as his personal investigation team OR that he's directing a leader of another country to work with his PERSONAL ATTORNEY to conduct an investigation into a political opponent?

If this were 1972, y'all would be claiming Nixon had a right to know what's going on in the DNC offices as the leader of the Executive branch.
 
Last edited:
horninchicago said:
But, this is neither a court of law nor a Congressional Committee. It's a message board. People draw initial conclusions and go from there.

And, as the results of the election, Mueller report, etc., all show, facts don't matter. People will believe what they want. Once this turns out to be yet another nothinburger, the media and left will not move on from it and finally let Trump do his job.
Click to expand...

Normally I would agree with Deez but we've seen too many incidents from the dems and their desire to make up things in order to go after our president.
 
Seattle Husker said:
Wait...a Conservative journalist on the Editorial Board of the WSJ doesn't think this ordeal is important? :yikes:

As I've said previously, we each have TDS, although the acronym has a different definition. While I'd like to see the POTUS be held accountable, you clearly have the opposite intention.

Is anyone concerned that Trump apparently sees Barr and the Justice Department as his personal investigation team OR that he's directing a leader of another country to work with his PERSONAL ATTORNEY to conduct an investigation into a political opponent?

If this were 1972, y'all would be claiming Nixon had a right to know what's going on in the DNC offices as the leader of the Executive branch.
Click to expand...
You apparently missed the comment that the DOJ has already determined that nothing illegal occurred.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Weekly Prediction Contest

* Predict HORNS-HOGS *
Sat, Nov 16 • 11:00 AM on ABC

Recent Threads

Prediction Results Threads

2024 Schedules

Back
Top