Impeachment
- Thread starter mchammer
- Start date
Joe Fan
10,000+ Posts
Here was Nancy Pelosi in a March 6 interview with the The Washington Post. She said a purely partisan impeachment vote was not just wrong but dangerous.
“I’m not for impeachment. This is news. I haven’t said this to any press person before. But since you asked, and I’ve been thinking about this, impeachment is so divisive to the country that unless there’s something so compelling and overwhelming and bipartisan, I don’t think we should go down that path because it divides the country. And he’s just not worth it.”
The climate against Trump; a hopelessly politicized media:
"... the decision to revive the anthem tradition comes at a time when overt allegiance to “The Star-Spangled Banner” has become one of the lines that separate blue and red America."
"Regardless of their intentions, Mark Clague, an associate professor of musicology at the University of Michigan, said that in an era in which support of the anthem has become a “loyalty test,” it is difficult to frame its reintroduction to the airwaves as apolitical.
“It is somewhat provocative to bring the anthem to the fore in a new way at a moment of tension in this country,” he said."
Local TV Revives a Bygone Tradition: Airing the National Anthem
"... the decision to revive the anthem tradition comes at a time when overt allegiance to “The Star-Spangled Banner” has become one of the lines that separate blue and red America."
"Regardless of their intentions, Mark Clague, an associate professor of musicology at the University of Michigan, said that in an era in which support of the anthem has become a “loyalty test,” it is difficult to frame its reintroduction to the airwaves as apolitical.
“It is somewhat provocative to bring the anthem to the fore in a new way at a moment of tension in this country,” he said."
Local TV Revives a Bygone Tradition: Airing the National Anthem
OUBubba
5,000+ Posts
Isn’t the whistleblower moot now? The “transcript” and multiple testimonies back up what he/she said.
disappeared like Epstein?
I've been reading a couple of things today:
1) The whistleblower has a second-hand account which lead to purported first-hand accounts.
2) The whistleblower has offered to answer written questions from the GOP "under oath and penalty of perjury" IF his name is kept anonymous.
Here is the comment made by his lawyer (note the sacredness):
"Being a whistleblower is not a partisan job nor is impeachment an objective. That is not our role,"
Apparently it is POLICY (see tweet below) to protect a whistleblowers identity from government officials (hence why they tag whistleblower is being used). This is a clear attempt to circumvent the idea of being able to confront your accuser. ESPECIALLY a second-hand accuser.
Tweet about policy:
"Despite long standing policy of HPSCI to protect #whistleblowers, especially anonymity (btw, this was consistent with my efforts w/GOP on #Benghazi), GOP has sought to expose our client's identity which could jeopardize their safety, as well as that of their family," Zaid tweeted Sunday morning.
Last edited:
The whistleblower was involved in 2016 election interference with help from Ukraine officials. His complaint was a proactive defense to avoid his actions being investigated.
He isn't really moot so much as he's of limited relevance. He doesn't have personal knowledge of any relevant facts. His report is hearsay from others. So would I call him as a witness? Yes but only to identify his sources and what those people told him..
Joe Fan
10,000+ Posts
lol
I35
5,000+ Posts
So we have a do nothing fake house democrats, pushing a fake narrative for impeachment, with a fake whistleblower, that is reported by the fake media, that are using fake polls to guide public opinion for a fake impeachment.
Meanwhile the House Dems have done nothing the last 3 years to justify what we the tax payers are paying them in salary. This is so F#%^*ed up!
Meanwhile the House Dems have done nothing the last 3 years to justify what we the tax payers are paying them in salary. This is so F#%^*ed up!
Prior to the whistleblower I'd say the Dems "accomplishments" since 2016 are as follows:
1) Support impeachment of Trump and aggressively pursue that goal (with a compliant media)
2) Buy votes: reparations, benefits for illegals, forgiveness of student loan debt, green justice, socialism as a catch-all.
I35
5,000+ Posts
I35
5,000+ Posts
They barely waited 19 minutes after the swearing in
This was always the plan
If you can’t beat him, try to impeach him.
They barely waited 19 minutes after the swearing in
This was always the plan
Yes... there is no doubt about this. Beto loudly proclaimed he would vote for impeachment prior to the release of the Mueller report. That is why I characterize this as a knife-fight with no rules. Those who are taking the Democrats sanctimonious comments about sadness over "where we are" and their "process" as being done in good-faith and what is right for America are emotionally driven. This is about power. Period.
As for the alleged quid pro quo with Ukraine, I'd say I can't decide what to think because of the context of the conversation: POWER. CORRUPTION (Biden's connections).
The context is a sewer.
after whistleblower ... the difference is what?
The answer is the same. I don't know why I didn't just say that instead.
And this certainly hurts the Democrats' credibility. If you've been pissing in your pants for no reason for three years, people are going to be suspicious when you piss in your pants for the hundredth time and scream, "now we have a good reason to piss in our pants."
It's the classic crying wolf story.
I35
5,000+ Posts
Not just him. The top 5 riches counties in America are all in the Washing DC area.
I35
5,000+ Posts
“Swampians?”
Joe Fan
10,000+ Posts
So the State Dept was forced to release some docs today via a FOIA request related to Burisma and Hunter Biden.
They are emails showing the Obama State Dept entertaining the lobbyist for Hunter Biden's company regarding Burisma's complaints about being prosecuted for corruption. And these dates show this was a month BEFORE Joe Biden pressured Ukraine to fire the prosecutor who was after Burisma.
They are emails showing the Obama State Dept entertaining the lobbyist for Hunter Biden's company regarding Burisma's complaints about being prosecuted for corruption. And these dates show this was a month BEFORE Joe Biden pressured Ukraine to fire the prosecutor who was after Burisma.
Joe Fan
10,000+ Posts
And this is why this guy, with ZERO experience in oil & gas production, was given all that money.
They were buying access.
And they got it.
This sort of corruption and cronyism has been going on in DC for a long time, on both sides. It's one BIG reason these people hate Trump so much -- he is rocking their world and they want him gone.
They were buying access.
And they got it.
This sort of corruption and cronyism has been going on in DC for a long time, on both sides. It's one BIG reason these people hate Trump so much -- he is rocking their world and they want him gone.
Last edited:
I35
5,000+ Posts
is it just me or does it seem like most of the Dems cult are backing away from this...... including the ones here on Hornfans? There goes another gotcha moment.
Weekly Prediction Contest
* Predict TEXAS-ULM *
Sat, Sep 21 • 7:00 PM on ESPN+/SECN+
Recent Threads
Prediction Results Threads
2024 Schedules
