Impeachment

Mr. Deez said:
That is precisely my point. A quid pro quo on its own isn't impeachable. For it to become impeachable, some kind of bad faith or nefarious intent would be required. Nobody has cared to prove that.
Click to expand...

The Bidens are a protected class unto themselves. They are untouchable and Trump dared to try.
 
There’s the whole rub for me. The ‘hold’ was initiated or at minimum, a point of consideration, so long before the call that I feel it quite reasonable the motive was more than the Biden crap. Although Biden was certainly a lot of crap! And until they really do debunk the debauchery of the Bidens activity I think it’s perfectly fine to have wanted them investigated but I do believe any President going forward better never say ‘do me a favor’. Those words are forever tainted (oh darn, did I have to use that word).
 
nashhorn said:
There’s the whole rub for me. The ‘hold’ was initiated or at minimum, a point of consideration, so long before the call that I feel it quite reasonable the motive was more than the Biden crap. Although Biden was certainly a lot of crap! And until they really do debunk the debauchery of the Bidens activity I think it’s perfectly fine to have wanted them investigated but I do believe any President going forward better never say ‘do me a favor’. Those words are forever tainted (oh darn, did I have to use that word).
Click to expand...

Wasnt it do "us" a favor though?
 
Phil Elliott said:
I still don't get why, even if there as a "quid pro quo", that is impeachable. Every negotiation has a quid pro quo, or otherwise there wouldn't need to be any negotiation. When I buy a car and haggle over the price, I am involved in a quid pro quo - Mr. Dealer, sell me the car for this price or else I won't buy it (ie, withhold my money from you). Should I go to jail for that? Should I be prevented from bargaining for a better price in that way? This whole thing is stupid.
Click to expand...
I agree with you. If the quo was better terms for gas leases or a promise on human rights or some other "state" benefit then you'd be right. The quo in this instance was announcing on US TV that you're investigating Biden. And, if Mulvaney, Rudy, Bolton, etc. could testify this would likely be established - h/t Bolton's reference to it as a drug deal.
 
nashhorn said:
There’s the whole rub for me. The ‘hold’ was initiated or at minimum, a point of consideration, so long before the call that I feel it quite reasonable the motive was more than the Biden crap. Although Biden was certainly a lot of crap! And until they really do debunk the debauchery of the Bidens activity I think it’s perfectly fine to have wanted them investigated but I do believe any President going forward better never say ‘do me a favor’. Those words are forever tainted (oh darn, did I have to use that word).
Click to expand...
Then why was this the first mention of ANY attempt in ANY of our national relations with regard to corruption? He's been in office for almost 3 years.
 
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...
I like Klobecher. Not sure she's liberal enough to make it through the gauntlet.
 
1). A billionaire pedophile with dirt on the Clintons got killed in his jail cell
Click to expand...

Why is everyone so sure he only has dirt on the other guys? The paucity of serious investigation by either side into the strong possibility of a murder and cover-up suggests he had dirt on a lot of powerful Republicans and powerful Democrats both.
 
Statalyzer said:
Why is everyone so sure he only has dirt on the other guys? The paucity of serious investigation by either side into the strong possibility of a murder and cover-up suggests he had dirt on a lot of powerful Republicans and powerful Democrats both.
Click to expand...
I'm open to the possibility that he has dirt on Clinton. What power does Clinton have now? If he had dirt on, say,....DJT, who has power these days?

I mean there is at least one rape allegation against the guy that involves Epstein.
 
Monahorns said:
Yeah. Most meth and coke heads felt vindicated by the Christianity Today article. Thanks for self identifying.
Click to expand...
This courageous editor had previously announced his retirement for Jan 2020.

I am perfectly fine if the guy thinks that Christians should not vote for Trump in 2020. Make that argument. But to argue that he should be removed from office is absurd.

Is there any doubt that he's a liberal.
 
Last edited:
OUBubba said:
And, if Mulvaney, Rudy, Bolton, etc. could testify this would likely be established - h/t Bolton's reference to it as a drug deal.
Click to expand...

If that's true (and it could be), then why not attempt to compel their testimony? If you're actually interested in impeaching a president, failing to do that is indefensible.
 
UTChE96 said:
Glad to know that the Christian hating, baby killers on the Left have concluded that this man is a credible Christian.
Click to expand...
[insert insult that would get me blocked] Democrats are Christians as well. I've taught middle school Sunday School. I was our church Treasurer at one time. I ran the slide show weekly. I picked up the donuts weekly (the worst!). Just because I'm a Democrat does not mean I can't be a Christian. And, even though our current president claims to be the most Christian president ever elected.....And, just because you're a Republican it doesn't mean you're a Christian. Jesus H...
 
OUBubba said:
[insert insult that would get me blocked] Democrats are Christians as well. I've taught middle school Sunday School. I was our church Treasurer at one time. I ran the slide show weekly. I picked up the donuts weekly (the worst!). Just because I'm a Democrat does not mean I can't be a Christian. And, even though our current president claims to be the most Christian president ever elected.....And, just because you're a Republican it doesn't mean you're a Christian. Jesus H...
Click to expand...
Chillax Barry. Didn't know you were so easily trolled. :)

That said, it's bizarre to listen to any Christian who votes for late-term abortion supporting Democratic candidates try to make a moral argument against Trump for withholding foreign aid to the Ukraine. Good grief.
 
"Do you think Chuck Schumer is impartial? Do you think Elizabeth Warren is impartial? Bernie Sanders is impartial? So let's quit the charade. This is a political exercise. ... All I'm asking of Schumer is that we treat Trump the same way we treated [President] Clinton," McConnell said.​

I set it for this part, but whole thing is worth a watch

 
UTChE96 said:
Chillax Barry. Didn't know you were so easily trolled. :)

That said, it's bizarre to listen to any Christian who votes for late-term abortion supporting Democratic candidates try to make a moral argument against Trump for withholding foreign aid to the Ukraine. Good grief.
Click to expand...
Don't be a ****
 
OUBubba said:
I like Klobecher. Not sure she's liberal enough to make it through the gauntlet.
Click to expand...

What's interesting about that is that her voting record is pretty liberal. You can find further left, but she's not a moderate in her voting. She isn't a Joe Manchin or a Doug Jones. Her record is basically comparable to your average Northeastern Democrat - similar to Booker's. (In fact, American Conservative Union actually gives a higher score to Bernie Sanders. Link.) However, she isn't an attention-hog and isn't a big fire breather. Outside of Chicago and Detroit, that kind of crap doesn't fly in the Midwest. The biggest difference between her and her competitors is tone, not ideology or substance.
 
Horn6721 said:
Why would Trump not be entitled to the same protections given a criminal as outlined in the 6th amendment?
Click to expand...
That's what the Senate trial is for, correct? My take is that Mitch is trying to gather the 51 votes to tamp it out immediately so that there's no unforseen damage and so those few Senators that are in somewhat split areas (like Susan Collins) don't have to go on record. Pelosi is trying to get some capital on witnesses. He literally could gun down someone on 5th Avenue and 2/3 of the Senate would not impeach.
 
OUBubba said:
[insert insult that would get me blocked] Democrats are Christians as well. I've taught middle school Sunday School. I was our church Treasurer at one time. I ran the slide show weekly. I picked up the donuts weekly (the worst!). Just because I'm a Democrat does not mean I can't be a Christian. And, even though our current president claims to be the most Christian president ever elected.....And, just because you're a Republican it doesn't mean you're a Christian. Jesus H...
Click to expand...

Bullseye!! Good post. I agree with you, hard core Republicans and Democrats do not have a monopoly on God or Jesus. Politically, I am neither a member of the Democratic nor Republican parties. I don't need to be told how to vote or what I should value in life. I personally don't care how or why a person votes, nor who a person votes for. Besides it's none of my business just as mine is none of theirs.
 
Mr. Deez said:
What's interesting about that is that her voting record is pretty liberal. You can find further left, but she's not a moderate in her voting. She isn't a Joe Manchin or a Doug Jones. Her record is basically comparable to your average Northeastern Democrat - similar to Booker's. (In fact, American Conservative Union actually gives a higher score to Bernie Sanders. Link.) However, she isn't an attention-hog and isn't a big fire breather. Outside of Chicago and Detroit, that kind of crap doesn't fly in the Midwest. The biggest difference between her and her competitors is tone, not ideology or substance.
Click to expand...

Having a slight degree of experience in Minnesota and its politics, this post is spot on. I'd like to add to it, but I'd just be repeating the truths above
 
meth and coke heads are reading Christianity Today as much as DJT. However, I hear he's going to give it up for Lent.
Click to expand...

Nobody really reads it anymore, but Progressives got excited when Twitter and Yahoo reported on the anti-Trump article.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Recent Threads

Back
Top