Official President Trump Impeachment Inquiry Thread

[EternalShinyAndChrome 2,527]

9 minutes ago, RaiderHaters Revenge said:

yep bad guys, thats like my friend still running with the kids in cages nonsense

 

You mean the ones that Obama put in there, right?  Because that's who started with kids in cages.  Weird how we never heard a peep from the lefties when Obama was doing it.

[Hardcore troubadour 12,660]

6 hours ago, RaiderHaters Revenge said:

yep bad guys, thats like my friend still running with the kids in cages nonsense

 

Yeah, the bad guy who's letting more people out of jail than he's putting in. Much to my chagrin.  

[avoiding injuries 1,220]

Prolific criminal? Interesting...

[Reality 2,710]

Nothing to see here folks.....

I mean.... What the actual fock... How are you folks on the left ok with this sh!t?

Enemy of the people..

[IGotWorms 3,317]

I agree, let Giuliani speak!

Dude digs himself and Trump in deeper with every word

[Reality 2,710]

4 minutes ago, IGotWorms said:

I agree, let Giuliani speak!

Dude digs himself and Trump in deeper with every word

Yeah, that's why they want him silenced..

[sderk 1,040]

6 minutes ago, IGotWorms said:

I agree, let Giuliani speak!

Dude digs himself and Trump in deeper with every word

I think Cortez should chime in right about now.

[Hardcore troubadour 12,660]

4 minutes ago, Reality said:

Yeah, that's why they want him silenced..

Worms ain't so smart. 

[sderk 1,040]

1 minute ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Worms ain't so smart. 

You are giving Worms too much credit with that statement. 

[cbfalcon 824]

I do not support Biden demanding that none of the networks invite Rudy on the air to speak. 

Unless it’s a matter of security or safety or something, the networks and media are free to have whoever they want on the air, and tell whatever story they see fit. 

[Hardcore troubadour 12,660]

7 minutes ago, cbfalcon said:

I do not support Biden demanding that none of the networks invite Rudy on the air to speak. 

Unless it’s a matter of security or safety or something, the networks and media are free to have whoever they want on the air, and tell whatever story they see fit. 

I'm curious who the other "bad guys in the world" are? Got any names, so we can compare? 

[cbfalcon 824]

8 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

I'm curious who the other "bad guys in the world" are? Got any names, so we can compare? 

No, I can’t think of any other bad guys. I guess that makes him the worst. 

[Hardcore troubadour 12,660]

3 minutes ago, cbfalcon said:

No, I can’t think of any other bad guys. I guess that makes him the worst. 

Safe to say you made a foolish statement then. 10-4. 

[naomi 343]

I had to school myself about what really happened with Trump and Zelensky. Major media and talking heads from either side are unreliable.

This is coming from a pro-impeachment yet fairly forensic stance: https://www.lawfareblog.com/how-understand-whistleblower-complaint

A good case (which I didn't necessarily expect) is made there. 

I doubt Trump is that exceptional compared to other presidents as far as the lengths he'll go to move his agenda forward. But if you focus solely on principle and forget anyone else, this is not behavior to accept simply because he's still better than alternatives, or because there is plenty of bogus bloodthirst against him. We lose our national foundation that way. We outright reject the founders' explicit warnings about how we throw everything away. The foundation we supposedly stand on is now hollow. Our house collapses.

But then there's a more cynical thought - we've already lost it. Lots of corners are playing dirty in an abject way. Join the game with your at least more palatable guy before they beat you and implement their unwittingly dystopian ideology with new gusto.

[drobeski 3,061]

Has anyone referred to the law or statute trump is alleged to have broken, yet ? 

Or are we doing panicked make believe like the last time ? 

[avoiding injuries 1,220]

4 hours ago, drobeski said:

Has anyone referred to the law or statute trump is alleged to have broken, yet ? 

Or are we doing panicked make believe like the last time ? 

If you cut, copy and paste the transcript like the media has done, it doesn’t sound great. 

Or, if you are reading a piece of paper and do a parody of the transcript while having people believe you’re reading the actual transcript, that might get traction. 

People are crazy for believing this scam...again. 

[drobeski 3,061]

53 minutes ago, avoiding injuries said:

If you cut, copy and paste the transcript like the media has done, it doesn’t sound great. 

Or, if you are reading a piece of paper and do a parody of the transcript while having people believe you’re reading the actual transcript, that might get traction. 

People are crazy for believing this scam...again. 

So no law or statute is alleged to have been broken. Surely if there was one, we would have heard it by now ? Maybe worms can cite the law allegedly broken.

[Alias Detective 1,179]

Why TF is Trump tweeting the words Civil War?  I’ll take all calls.

 

 

 

[Fireballer 2,384]

26 minutes ago, Alias Detective said:

Why TF is Trump tweeting the words Civil War?  I’ll take all calls.

 

 

 

Yeah.  Some here cant get past the fact some of his tweets are asinine and over the top.  I bet Riversco has hard on from it though.  

[MDC 5,895]

36 minutes ago, Alias Detective said:

Why TF is Trump tweeting the words Civil War?  I’ll take all calls.

 

 

 

I was wondering why he’s implying that the whistleblower was a spy who should get the death penalty.  

[drobeski 3,061]

Who is this third hand hearsay whistleblower anyway? Shouldn't we the American people and the president himself get to know who the man/woman is behind this attempt to remove a duly elected president from office ? 

We should know everything about this person. What are his motives ? Who leaked ? 

You shouldn't get to be incognito when you're attempting to remove a president.  

 

[Cdub100 3,384]

46 minutes ago, Alias Detective said:

Why TF is Trump tweeting the words Civil War?  I’ll take all calls.

 

 

 

How long where you in a coma? One party is trying to install socialism and take everyone's guns away. The other party is just sitting on their hands. The president of the United States is under 24/7 attack and is trying to be removed from office he was elected to.

[TimmySmith 2,782]

The sad thing about the left is they are so locked into the 2 party system that they support a 24/7/365 attack on a President that clearly is NOT supported by the swamp.

 

[RLLD 3,455]

28 minutes ago, MDC said:

I was wondering why he’s implying that the whistleblower was a spy who should get the death penalty.  

Why bring Edward Snowden into this?

[MDC 5,895]

1 minute ago, RLLD said:

Why bring Edward Snowden into this?

What happened to Snowden is awful. So is this he POTUS suggesting that a government whistleblower should get the firing squad. HTH

[edjr 5,567]

2 minutes ago, MDC said:

What happened to Snowden is awful. So is this he POTUS suggesting that a government whistleblower should get the firing squad. HTH

POTUS or POS

[IGotWorms 3,317]

49 minutes ago, MDC said:

I was wondering why he’s implying that the whistleblower was a spy who should get the death penalty.  

A second impeachable offense right there. Generally we don’t condone witness intimidation in this country, nor should we.

[RLLD 3,455]

22 minutes ago, MDC said:

What happened to Snowden is awful. So is this he POTUS suggesting that a government whistleblower should get the firing squad. HTH

SO can we at least agree that anyone who calls out political corruption should be identified as "heroic", I mean, I think that can be some common ground for us on this, right?

 

[MDC 5,895]

1 minute ago, RLLD said:

SO can we at least agree that anyone who calls out political corruption should be identified as "heroic", I mean, I think that can be some common ground for us on this, right?

 

We just agreed on that. Hopefully we agree that the President shouldn’t be saying whistleblowers are traitors who should get shot. 

[RLLD 3,455]

1 minute ago, MDC said:

We just agreed on that. Hopefully we agree that the President shouldn’t be saying whistleblowers are traitors who should get shot. 

Well, if Trump wants to be the whistleblower who outs Biden's misdealing with Ukraine, I am inclined to suggest he might have access to the same protections......

[MDC 5,895]

Just now, RLLD said:

Well, if Trump wants to be the whistleblower who outs Biden's misdealing with Ukraine, I am inclined to suggest he might have access to the same protections......

You are such a hack.  

[RLLD 3,455]

1 minute ago, MDC said:

You are such a hack.  

Oops, did your tunnel-vision logic stop working when it was applied against your bias?  I guess that must happen when your position is depending on ideology....

[EternalShinyAndChrome 2,527]

8 minutes ago, MDC said:

We just agreed on that. Hopefully we agree that the President shouldn’t be saying whistleblowers are traitors who should get shot. 

Well, except for that fact that this anonymous guy/gal is actually not a whistleblower.  He/She has no first-hand information which, by definition, cannot make them a "whistelblower".

[Fireballer 2,384]

55 minutes ago, drobeski said:

Who is this third hand hearsay whistleblower anyway? Shouldn't we the American people and the president himself get to know who the man/woman is behind this attempt to remove a duly elected president from office ? 

We should know everything about this person. What are his motives ? Who leaked ? 

You shouldn't get to be incognito when you're attempting to remove a president.  

 

And the change in who a whistleblower can be?  Wtf?  They change it from 1st person info to hearsay and, violia!  We immediately have a wistleblower. 

[Fireballer 2,384]

2 minutes ago, EternalShinyAndChrome said:

Well, except for that fact that this anonymous guy/gal is actually not a whistleblower.  He/She has no first-hand information which, by definition, cannot make them a "whistelblower".

But they just conveniently changed that.

[MDC 5,895]

1 minute ago, RLLD said:

Oops, did your tunnel-vision logic stop working when it was applied against your bias?  I guess that must happen when your position is depending on ideology....

Let’s see: Biden to our knowledge didn’t do anything, and I’ve said from the beginning “Fock him” and if you want to make hay out of Hunter Biden’s sweetheart “consulting” gig and the fact that it was also certainly influence peddling go right ahead. I wasn’t voting for him anyway. 

None of this has to do with Trump’s own dealings on the Ukraine or whether it’s appropriate or responsible for a POTUS to start invoking treason and the firing squad in response to a government whistleblower. This is just typical Whataboutism.

You’re comparing apples, oranges, coconuts and cinderblocks, flailing hard to make a point about hypocrisy that isn’t there. Because deep down you’re a waffling hack and not a particularly bright one either. 

HTH but I know it won’t.  

[TimmySmith 2,782]

12 hours ago, IGotWorms said:

I agree, let Giuliani speak!

Dude digs himself and Trump in deeper with every word

And, well, Biden. 

[RLLD 3,455]

8 minutes ago, MDC said:

Let’s see: Biden to our knowledge didn’t do anything, and I’ve said from the beginning “Fock him” and if you want to make hay out of Hunter Biden’s sweetheart “consulting” gig and the fact that it was also certainly influence peddling go right ahead. I wasn’t voting for him anyway. 

None of this has to do with Trump’s own dealings on the Ukraine or whether it’s appropriate or responsible for a POTUS to start invoking treason and the firing squad in response to a government whistleblower. This is just typical Whataboutism.

You’re comparing apples, oranges, coconuts and cinderblocks, flailing hard to make a point about hypocrisy that isn’t there. Because deep down you’re a waffling hack and not a particularly bright one either. 

HTH but I know it won’t.  

Qualifications?  Are we going to be allowed to add some nuances to determine who can do what?

I am good with that, are you sure that YOU are?  Will you allow others to nuance their perceptions?  Just asking because if we go down this road we will A)likely never agree and B)potentially allow criminal activity because hey...we agree with the criminal ideologically....

So if a "whistelblowers" actions are to be assessed based on who they are or support, or oppose....I doubt we arrive at a just and fair system since we allow corruption for some, but not others....no thank you....

[MDC 5,895]

9 minutes ago, RLLD said:

Qualifications?  Are we going to be allowed to add some nuances to determine who can do what?

I am good with that, are you sure that YOU are?  Will you allow others to nuance their perceptions?  Just asking because if we go down this road we will A)likely never agree and B)potentially allow criminal activity because hey...we agree with the criminal ideologically....

So if a "whistelblowers" actions are to be assessed based on who they are or support, or oppose....I doubt we arrive at a just and fair system since we allow corruption for some, but not others....no thank you....

I seriously have no idea what this verbal diarrhea even means or why you’re incapable of saying where you stand on a sitting POTUS suggesting a whistleblower gets the firing squad. 

[TimmySmith 2,782]

10 minutes ago, MDC said:

I seriously have no idea what this verbal diarrhea even means or why you’re incapable of saying where you stand on a sitting POTUS suggesting a whistleblower gets the firing squad. 

We all know where we stand on lying trolls who make things up.