The First Trump Impeachment Thread

[ActualCornHusker]

4 minutes ago, Landlord said:

 

 

 

Just as easy to presume that the person is somewhere in the middle of the spectrum, comes in new and sees a big group of people with a more left perspective and generally all agreeing about a lot of conclusions, so instead of just posting along "yeah, I agree" finds ways to counter the overarching narrative of the community.

 

In other words, maybe the fact that we all already agree might be part of what's contributing to his posts being less critical or pushing back on certain things (support, defense, and disagreement are not the same words btw; I haven't seen him do much of any supporting of Trump).

 

 

 

When I go home to Nebraska people think I'm a flaming libtard snowflake radical leftist. When I hang out with my super woke progressive friends sometimes they think I'm a toxic male with problematic conservative views. Because when we get into conversations, I already know all the things in which we agree with, so those generally go without saying. Hence, I end up arguing the side most counter to the group I'm in. 

 

Correct, except for the part about being in the middle. I suppose it depends on what political spectrum you're referring to. This one is most accurate IMO:

 

[QMany]

Without getting into the weeds with those making bad-faith QPQ arguments...

 

It is still an improper abuse of power to ask a foreign government to announce a "ginned-up" investigation to sway our next election, with or without the $400M aid and WH meeting.

[Nebfanatic]

Just now, QMany said:

Without getting into the weeds with those making bad-faith QPQ arguments...

 

It is still an improper abuse of power to ask a foreign government to announce a "ginned-up" investigation to sway our next election, with or without the $400M aid and WH meeting.

Exactly. Every step of the way it is abuse of power and there is literally no denying he asked for this its in the transcript and he has repeated it many times. What is there to defend?

[ActualCornHusker]

5 minutes ago, FrankWheeler said:

 

 

The White House Chief of Staff confirmed that the aid was tied to the investigation and meeting.

 

 

 

I think you heard what you wanted to hear...

[knapplc]

12 minutes ago, Landlord said:

Just as easy to presume that the person is somewhere in the middle of the spectrum, comes in new and sees a big group of people with a more left perspective and generally all agreeing about a lot of conclusions, so instead of just posting along "yeah, I agree" finds ways to counter the overarching narrative of the community.

 

To what end? Truth is truth, facts are facts, and bias is bias.

 

If people here are posting untruths, then fine - call me/them/us out. But what's great about this forum - P&R in particular - is full of people for whom facts are important.  A person who respects facts more than ideology wouldn't simply come in and be contrarian for the sake of being contrarian.

 

Further, that's not at all what's happening here. We have established facts here - but the person you're talking about is attempting to obfuscate those facts. For the sake of what? What exactly are you claiming is the goal here?

[FrankWheeler]

5 minutes ago, ActualCornHusker said:

 

I think you heard what you wanted to hear...

 

I heard:

 

Mulvaney:  "Did he also mention to me in the past that the corruption related to the DNC server?  Absolutely. No question about that.  But thats it, that's why we held up the money."

 

Did you hear something other than that?

[knapplc]

9 minutes ago, QMany said:

Without getting into the weeds with those making bad-faith QPQ arguments...

 

It is still an improper abuse of power to ask a foreign government to announce a "ginned-up" investigation to sway our next election, with or without the $400M aid and WH meeting.

 

And that is the simple, basic, unvarnished truth.

 

And that isn't even getting into withholding evidence, burying things on secure servers, prohibiting public officials from even providing testimony... a litany of other sins happening here.

[teachercd]

18 minutes ago, Landlord said:

 

 

 

Just as easy to presume that the person is somewhere in the middle of the spectrum, comes in new and sees a big group of people with a more left perspective and generally all agreeing about a lot of conclusions, so instead of just posting along "yeah, I agree" finds ways to counter the overarching narrative of the community.

 

In other words, maybe the fact that we all already agree might be part of what's contributing to his posts being less critical or pushing back on certain things (support, defense, and disagreement are not the same words btw; I haven't seen him do much of any supporting of Trump).

 

 

 

When I go home to Nebraska people think I'm a flaming libtard snowflake radical leftist. When I hang out with my super woke progressive friends sometimes they think I'm a toxic male with problematic conservative views. Because when we get into conversations, I already know all the things in which we agree with, so those generally go without saying. Hence, I end up arguing the side most counter to the group I'm in. 

You troll your friends...Ha

[commando]

sounds familiar

 

 

[B.B. Hemingway]

If I was on the left (or on the right and against Trump, in my case) my biggest concern would be that this political stunt is just going to strengthen the resolve of Trump supporters. He's not going to be impeached. Everyone knows, and has known that.

[ActualCornHusker]

Just now, FrankWheeler said:

 

I heard:

 

Mulvaney:  "Did he also mention to me in the past that the corruption related to the DNC server?  Absolutely. No question about that.  But thats it, that's why we held up the money."

 

You have to take that in the full context. He's describing that they held up the money because of their concerns about corruption, and the DNC server was one EXAMPLE that he put forth of that corruption... 

[FrankWheeler]

4 minutes ago, ActualCornHusker said:

 

You have to take that in the full context. He's describing that they held up the money because of their concerns about corruption, and the DNC server was one EXAMPLE that he put forth of that corruption... 

 

You have to take that into full context!  Trump mentioned the Crowdstrike server AND the Biden's on the phone call with the President of Ukraine!

 

Not to mention the Ukraine / Crowdstrike thing is nonsense!

 

You can't tell me to look at things into context when you are ignoring the entire context of the situation.

[knapplc]

Just now, ActualCornHusker said:

 

You have to take that in the full context. He's describing that they held up the money because of their concerns about corruption, and the DNC server was one EXAMPLE that he put forth of that corruption... 

 

But that's a lie. There was no concern about corruption. If Trump was concerned about corruption in Ukraine, he'd have enlisted all the power of the United States government to root it out. But he didn't. He called the Ukrainian president and requested that he stand in front of a podium and state that Ukraine was investigating Biden. The release of aid was contingent on that act.

 

[Nebfanatic]

6 minutes ago, B.B. Hemingway said:

If I was on the left (or on the right and against Trump, in my case) my biggest concern would be that this political stunt is just going to strengthen the resolve of Trump supporters. He's not going to be impeached. Everyone knows, and has known that.

It's not about beating Trump its about holding the President accountable to the Constitution. It is Congresses duty, they have no choice. Trump has left them no choice.

[QMany]

8 minutes ago, ActualCornHusker said:

 

You have to take that in the full context. He's describing that they held up the money because of their concerns about corruption, and the DNC server was one EXAMPLE that he put forth of that corruption... 

 

Since 2017, the National Defense Authorization Act has stated that no more than half of the aid to Ukraine could be released until certification by the secretary of defense that “substantial actions” have been taken to decrease corruption. 

 

In May, Trump's own Department of Defense wrote a letter to Congress:

Quote

 

"On behalf of the Secretary of Defense, and in coordination with the Secretary of State, I have certified that the Government of Ukraine has taken substantial actions to make defense institutional reforms for the purposes of decreasing corruption [and] increasing accountability."

 

https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/6430088/Pentagon-Letter-On-Ukraine-Aid.pdf

 

Our country's concerns about corruption were already vetted with regard to the aid. Trump's personal concerns were different.