Jump to content
knapplc

The First Trump Impeachment Thread

Recommended Posts

I don't even know why the House GOP is even fighting this.  It's obviously going to die in the Senate trial, per Moscow Mitch.  Why delay the inevitable?

 

 

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post

48 minutes ago, alexhortdog95 said:

I don't even know why the House GOP is even fighting this.  It's obviously going to die in the Senate trial, per Moscow Mitch.  Why delay the inevitable?

 

 

 

They're doing their constitutional job?  I don't understand why people think it's a waste of time.  They've sworn an oath to do this job and people wonder why they're doing this job?

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, BlitzFirst said:

 

They're doing their constitutional job?  I don't understand why people think it's a waste of time.  They've sworn an oath to do this job and people wonder why they're doing this job?

 

Well...

 

1. Because the Senate Majority leader has already stated that his goal is not to look at the case objectively (see appearance on Fox 'News' yesterday)

 

2. Because the House Republicans have yet to argue the facts of the case and are arguing process only.

 

3. Because if Senate/House Republicans were serious about their oaths, they'd be looking at this objectively and not in a partisan way.

 

 

  • Plus1 3

Share this post


Link to post
9 minutes ago, alexhortdog95 said:

 

Well...

 

1. Because the Senate Majority leader has already stated that his goal is not to look at the case objectively (see appearance on Fox 'News' yesterday)

 

2. Because the House Republicans have yet to argue the facts of the case and are arguing process only.

 

3. Because if Senate/House Republicans were serious about their oaths, they'd be looking at this objectively and not in a partisan way.

 

 

 

The reason is because it's a big showboat for their voters and the dear leader.  If they show him they are fighting for him, he will be nice to them.

 

The Republican's outrage last night was the biggest show boat I've seen (outside of the daily Trump) in a very long time.  What a joke.

  • Plus1 2
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
8 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

 

The reason is because it's a big showboat for their voters and the dear leader.  If they show him they are fighting for him, he will be nice to them.

 

The Republican's outrage last night was the biggest show boat I've seen (outside of the daily Trump) in a very long time.  What a joke.

 

True that.  I will admit, however - Doug Collins is a much better advocate for the president than Farmer Devin was, hahahahaha

Share this post


Link to post
17 hours ago, Decoy73 said:

And defendants who defy subpoenas end up in jail.  Wouldn’t that also be a great day, Joe?

You've heard of 'contempt of court.'  SCOTUS will hear a case on the [obvious politically motivated] subpoena of Trump's tax returns.  In no way is Trump or anyone in jeopardy for arguing their rights in a court of law. 

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, Notre Dame Joe said:

You've heard of 'contempt of court.'  SCOTUS will hear a case on the [obvious politically motivated] subpoena of Trump's tax returns.  In no way is Trump or anyone in jeopardy for arguing their rights in a court of law. 

 

ELv8X7yWsAAd2co.jpg

  • Plus1 3

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, Notre Dame Joe said:

You've heard of 'contempt of court.'  SCOTUS will hear a case on the [obvious politically motivated] subpoena of Trump's tax returns.  In no way is Trump or anyone in jeopardy for arguing their rights in a court of law. 

Oh you mean the tax returns he promised to release to the public, as every President has done since Nixon, yet still hasn't? Are those the tax returns you are referring to?

  • Plus1 2

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, Notre Dame Joe said:

You've heard of 'contempt of court.'  SCOTUS will hear a case on the [obvious politically motivated] subpoena of Trump's tax returns.  In no way is Trump or anyone in jeopardy for arguing their rights in a court of law. 

 

Going to go ahead and assume you would've applauded Hillary's State Department issuing a blanket refusal to cooperate and going to the courts, while trying to work SCOTUS on her Twitter feed, in order to prevent Congress from doing any oversight or the public from knowing anything about Benghazi or her emails.

 

You must've been gobsmacked when she - gasp - actually showed up to testify (for 8 hours) when subpoenaed, being the fierce advocate of individual liberties and skeptic of Congressional harassment you are.

 

Sound about right?

 

(It must suck to be a Trump supporter and know in your heart of heart that Hillary Clinton of all people has more balls than Trump.)

  • Plus1 7

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Danny Bateman said:

 

Going to go ahead and assume you would've applauded Hillary's State Department issuing a blanket refusal to cooperate and going to the courts, while trying to work SCOTUS on her Twitter feed, in order to prevent Congress from doing any oversight or the public from knowing anything about Benghazi or her emails.

 

You must've been gobsmacked when she - gasp - actually showed up to testify (for 8 hours) when subpoenaed, being the fierce advocate of individual liberties and skeptic of Congressional harassment you are.

 

Sound about right?

 

(It must suck to be a Trump supporter and know in your heart of heart that Hillary Clinton of all people has more balls than Trump.)

@Notre Dame Joe

 

just wanted to tag you again to make sure you saw this :thumbs

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, commando said:

 

ELv8X7yWsAAd2co.jpg

 

 

 

Glad you posted that as I came by to share what I'm listening to during Army-Navy commercials.

 

A "Jerrold Nadler" is chastising Congress for equating "sins" with "crimes" and, not all crimes are "high crimes."

 

The channel is called C-SPAN, show is "Clinton Impeachment."  We could all benefit from watching just a few minutes of this mirror universe.

 

+ now Representative Charles Schumer lecturing us on how the "punishment must fit the crime" and Censure is the appropriate remedy for a Presidential low crime.

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, Notre Dame Joe said:

 

 

 

Glad you posted that as I came by to share what I'm listening to during Army-Navy commercials.

 

A "Jerrold Nadler" is chastising Congress for equating "sins" with "crimes" and, not all crimes are "high crimes."

 

The channel is called C-SPAN, show is "Clinton Impeachment."  We could all benefit from watching just a few minutes of this mirror universe.

 

+ now Representative Charles Schumer lecturing us on how the "punishment must fit the crime" and Censure is the appropriate remedy for a Presidential low crime.

i was a hard core republican at that time.   and even i thought impeaching a president for having sex was stupid.   by that standard we probably should have impeached most of our presidents.

Share this post


Link to post

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.










×
×
  • Create New...