Jump to content

The First Trump Impeachment Thread


Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

 

 

Yep. The moment I saw that I was like... What? No.

 

Remember the LA Times is a pretty conservative publication. It's not the first time they've made a slight error on the side of Republicans.

  • Plus1 1
Link to post

  • Replies 3.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

You have long ago proven yourself to be intellectually dishonest and resistant to facts and reason.

Interesting thing about this.     Shokin was widely viewed as a corrupt prosecutor by almost all of our allies.  It was widely known within our our foreign policy team that he actually neede

You would invoke Alan Dershowitz to defend Donald Trump.  He defended Epstein and procured his sweetheart deal that allowed him to continue raping children. Epstein pled the 5th when as

Posted Images

9 hours ago, knapplc said:

The argument against witnesses is nonsense. "It's an election year" is not an excuse to not fully investigate these allegations.

 

 

 

 

 

So wait, Republicans believe that neither confirming a SC Justice nor holding the president accountable are allowed during election years?

 

Isn't the ENTIRE POINT of this to get to a place where all the facts are "out there?"

 

Isn't the whole point for people to not kind of know the facts but have no doubt about the facts?

I mean what the fresh hell. I can't believe these are the people we elect to lead us.

  • Plus1 2
Link to post

54 minutes ago, Danny Bateman said:

 

So wait, Republicans believe that neither confirming a SC Justice nor holding the president accountable are allowed during election years?

 

Isn't the ENTIRE POINT of this to get to a place where all the facts are "out there?"

 

Isn't the whole point for people to not kind of know the facts but have no doubt about the facts?

I mean what the fresh hell. I can't believe these are the people we elect to lead us.

Right?  so basically there are only 3 years out of every 4 in which there is enforceable law.  And soon enough that would be stretched by Mitch.

Link to post
1 hour ago, NM11046 said:

Right?  so basically there are only 3 years out of every 4 in which there is enforceable law.  And soon enough that would be stretched by Mitch.

Plus the laws were broken in year 3 not 4.  It''s also funny that the GOP is accusing the Dems of "rushing" the impeachment, but then they also say the trial will take too long for witnesses and we are apparently too close to the next election to remove the President.  Unbelievable.  Hey GOP, get your talking points straight at least.  

 

How anyone can take some of these clowns seriously is beyond my comprehension.  I am a Centrist , but I still really hope that in addition to beating Trump, the Dems can overtake the Senate in 2020.  The GOP needs to be put in their place, because the party has some REALLY bad representation in congress right now.  They need a major reset.  

  • Plus1 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to post

@BigRedBuster because they didn't read it like everyone else?

 

16 hours ago, Decoy73 said:

This isn’t a criminal trial.  You can’t draw that parallel.  Attorney/client privilege doesn’t apply when the “proverbial “ jury is the voting American public and the “proverbial “ attorney is a nation security adviser or chief of staff.  The only exception would be sensitive classified material that involved national security.  That doesn’t apply here.  This is election interference and as a voter I have the right to know if candidate A leveraged a foreign entity to harm the reputation of candidate B.  

"This" is the Impeachment Trial not the politics as usual thread.  I have no doubt Bolton will publish his tell all book {after it is cleared for classified material} and go on the CNN circuit for 15 minutes before he's inevitably put on the list below Stormy Daniels.  Trump has always antagonized everyone he fires so it's not surprising he leaves a trail of angry people looking to pay him back. But Executive Privilege has been invoked since President Washington and absolutely protects the Chief Executive's meetings with his advisors, and the law doesn't change when one gets rankled. 

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

absolutely protects

executive privilege is NOT a law and isn’t in the constitution.  So it doesn’t “absolutely” protect anything.  When you have time, check out how the Supreme Court unanimously ruled on Nixon’s use of it.  

  • Plus1 5
Link to post

according to the current crop of mafia related republicans  a president can't ever be impeached.  all he has to do is invoke executive privilege and tie things up in court forever.   we might as well take that out of the constitution.  what else will this batch of republicans want to remove from the constitution?

 

 

Link to post

  

6 hours ago, Notre Dame Joe said:

But Executive Privilege has been invoked since President Washington and absolutely protects the Chief Executive's meetings with his advisors, and the law doesn't change when one gets rankled. 

 

We know Executive Privilege is not absolute; there you go lying again.

 

My favorite part about the Executive Privilege hail mary is their cult leader on Twitter waiving it repeatedly. "You know that conversation where 'I NEVER told John Bolton that the aid to Ukraine was tied to investigations into Democrats, including the Bidens?' Yeah, that conversation I NEVER HAD is absolutely privileged. Durrr"

  • Plus1 5
  • Haha 1
Link to post
 
Quote

 

If Trump cared about fighting corruption, WHY did he cut the State Department’s budget for fighting it? 
 
If Trump cared about corruption, why did his administration send a note to Congress confirming Ukraine had made progress on it—AS PART OF A LETTER CALLING ON CONGRESS TO APPROPRIATE THE AID? 
 
If Trump cared about corruption, why did he ONLY care about Ukraine investigating his chief political rival? (There‘s not exactly a shortage of corrupt companies in Ukraine...) 
 
If Trump cared about corruption, why, when he was asked, couldn’t he name a SINGLE other country in which he was fighting it? 
 
If Trump cared about corruption, why would he have wanted Ukraine to ANNOUNCE an investigation into Biden, instead of conducting it in secret — as all corruption investigations are conducted. 
 
The answer to all of these questions is that Donald Trump, the most corrupt president in recent history, doesn’t give a sh*t about corruption. Republicans know that. And anyone in the media taking this argument at face value is doing a massive disservice to the public.

 

 
  • Plus1 3
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.






×
×
  • Create New...