Pelosi officially announces impeachment inquiry

[Tgo01]

Tomorrows going to be fun in this thread.

Is Trump finally being impeached tomorrow?

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/MEX/mexico/trade-balance-deficit

https://ustr.gov/callout/nafta-documents

So is your argument against NAFTA? I can see why, per your sources two years since 1994 there was a trade surplus, the rest a deficit. I mean, before NAFTA we had a better deal. Right, that's your source.

[Seran]

So is your argument against NAFTA? I can see why, per your sources two years since 1994 there was a trade surplus, the rest a deficit. I mean, before NAFTA we had a better deal. Right, that's your source.

Way to move the goalpost and claim a win there, RINO. What my original post said, in case you forgot or hit your head, was that in only 16% of the time in the last 60 years have we had a trade surplus with Mexico. You're shorting NAFTA with the completely erroneous and misleading argument that two WHOLE years there was a trade surplus and my post points out how absolutely disingenuous your statement is by citing facts.

This is precisely why people don't sight facts to you creatures, you either do not understand it or completely disregard it because it doesn't further your argument. Fortunately political reality isn't shaped by your confusion.

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

Way to move the goalpost and claim a win there, RINO. What my original post said, in case you forgot or hit your head, was that in only 16% of the time in the last 60 years have we had a trade surplus with Mexico. You're shorting NAFTA with the completely erroneous and misleading argument that two WHOLE years there was a trade surplus and my post points out how absolutely disingenuous your statement is by citing facts.

This is precisely why people don't sight facts to you creatures, you either do not understand it or completely disregard it because it doesn't further your argument. Fortunately political reality isn't shaped by your confusion.

So your argument is NAFTA had no positive impact then? Or it made no difference? What part of it didn't pan out am I missing?

[Neveragain]

So your argument is NAFTA had no positive impact then? Or it made no difference? What part of it didn't pan out am I missing?


The deal has long been a political target. In 2008, then–presidential candidate Barack Obama responded to widespread trade skepticism among the Democratic base by promising to renegotiate NAFTA to include tougher labor and environmental standards, a pledge he subsequently abandoned. The issue resurfaced in the 2016 presidential campaign, with both Senator Bernie Sanders (I–VT) and Donald Trump criticizing the pact for bringing U.S. job losses. ~ Council on Foreign Relations.

And the neoliberals wonder how it's possible that they lost to Trump.

The doubling down on destroying the middle class is amazing to watch.

[Seran]

A random quote, that's what you come back with? You really are a waste of time.

[Seran]

You obviously haven't read a single thing posted showing the massive increase in trade or business benefits of NAFTA. If you're unwilling to educate yourself, then I won't either. Good luck child.

[Neveragain]

You obviously haven't read a single thing posted showing the massive increase in trade or business benefits of NAFTA. If you're unwilling to educate yourself, then I won't either. Good luck child.

No, you're right. How would we have ever survived with the tariffs on chiclets and turquoise.

You're really missing the part about what jobs went south of the border in exchange for the jobs it created here.

Most of this is moot, as it is not me that gets to go campaign in the rust belt and explain to the UAW that NAFTA was good for them.

[Seran]

No, you're right. How would we have ever survived with the tariffs on chiclets and turquoise.

You're really missing the part about what jobs went south of the border in exchange for the jobs it created here.

Most of this is moot, as it is not me that gets to go campaign in the rust belt and explain to the UAW that NAFTA was good for them.

Chiclets and turquoise, how plainly racist. How about cars and parts, household electronics and appliances? All of which is assembled more economically in Mexico to the benefit of US Consumers.

[Methais]

Chiclets and turquoise, how plainly racist. How about cars and parts, household electronics and appliances? All of which is assembled more economically in Mexico to the benefit of US Consumers.


Ok I’ll bite. What’s racist about chiclets and turquoise?

[Tgo01]

Ok I’ll bite. What’s racist about chiclets and turquoise?

If you have to ask it just proves you’re racist.

[Neveragain]

Chiclets and turquoise, how plainly racist. How about cars and parts, household electronics and appliances? All of which is assembled more economically in Mexico to the benefit of US Consumers.

Precisely, the cars and parts, household electronics and appliances that used to be manufactured in the US.

But exploiting brown people at .20 cents on the dollar and no environmental laws is exactly what the Democrats are all about.

[Methais]

If you have to ask it just proves you’re racist.

But I like chiclets, which means he’s the racist.

RACIST!

[Neveragain]

If you have to ask it just proves you’re racist.

Did you know it costs less to produce a cog when there's no environmental laws and labor is 500% cheaper?

[Seran]

Precisely, the cars and parts, household electronics and appliances that used to be manufactured in the US.

But exploiting brown people at .20 cents on the dollar and no environmental laws is exactly what the Democrats are all about.

Exploitation? Are you sure you're not a Democrat, because bemoaning the low wages of another country which are taken advantage of by US corporations is their rallying cry.

[Seran]

The closer we get to impeachment the harder conservatives project.

I always thought Republicans enjoyed the campaign contributions received from corporate donors from the profits of their "exploitation". I guess this is bizarro world now.

[Neveragain]

Exploitation? Are you sure you're not a Democrat, because bemoaning the low wages of another country which are taken advantage of by US corporations is their rallying cry.

I have stated numerous times that I voted Democrat 5 out of the 8 presidential elections in my life and Republican only twice. The Republicans were Perot and Ron Paul.

I have never said I was a Republican, I'm a hippie Jesus freak.

[~Rocktar~]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bc08odzUJ7U

Nice 8 yr old video. What a rube.

[Tgo01]

I haven’t kept up on the news much today. Trump any closer to being impeached or the Democrats still dangling the carrot for their easily misled base?

[Alfster]

I haven’t kept up on the news much today. Trump any closer to being impeached or the Democrats still dangling the carrot for their easily misled base?

Today's update was basically a bunch of documents of misinformation on Ukraine that was distributed at high levels of the state department. Seems to be more information on pompeo, but we'll never see them.

[~Rocktar~]

It's funny because Trump said that there should be gators in the Rio Grande, and a moat, unironically. So unironically that the State Dept. ran a cost report on the absurd (even by Trump's standards) idea.

The funny part is that Obama jokingly suggested it 8 years ago in El Paso. That city that Trump's campaign still hasn't paid. In fact, Trump's debt to El Paso is 14% of the total debt owed to the city of El Paso.

The really funny part is that you build the all on the US side and the river basically makes a moat and with the continuing spread of alligators in the Americas and likely some dumbass releases some crocs like they have released boas and pythons and so on in the Everglades and nature will take care of it.

He should have lead with this and then you crybullies would be more receptive to just building a wall.

[~Rocktar~]

See, that's not funny though.

The truth hurts sometimes.

[Seran]

Let us not forget the video of Trump decompensating during a joint appearance with Finland's president.

[RichardCranium]

Both sides are the big gay right now.

If the left doesn't get their shit together soon it's 4 more years of Trump.

[Alfster]

I found it hilarious when he defined what he believes is treason. Lying. Exactly what he does.

Q Thank you, sir. Jeff Mason from Reuters. Mr. President, I’d like to ask you about your use of the word “treason.” You used it repeatedly in the last few days. Do you consider anyone who opposes you treasonous?

PRESIDENT TRUMP: No. No. I consider when they lie; when they stand before our great body in our great chamber, and they make up a story that’s fiction, like Schiff did. He took that perfect conversation I had with the Ukrainian President, and he made it into a total lie. It was a total fabrication. And you do admit that. It was a total fabrication.

He said, “This is what…” — and the only ones that don’t like my conversation are the ones that never read it. But they heard Shifty Schiff. That’s what I call a lie. And because of the fact that he’s — he’s lying about the President of the United States and as to what the President says — you know, I — believe it or not, I watch my words very carefully. There are those that think I’m a very stable genius. Okay? I watch my words very, very closely. And to have somebody get up and to totally fabricate a conversation that I had with another leader and make it sound so bad — it was so evil. And now I see this that just came out minutes ago, where he met at a time that was impossible to have done unless there’s corruption involved.

And just so you know, we’ve been investigating, on a personal basis — through Rudy and others, lawyers — corruption in the 2016 election. We’ve been investigating corruption, because I probably will — I was going to definitely — but I probably will be bringing a lot of litigation against a lot of people having to do with the corrupt investigation, having to do with the 2016 election.

[Seran]

It's the "very stable genius" part that's just pure art. I wonder what people a hundred years from now reading the history books will think of those transcripts.

[Astray]

Both sides are the big gay right now.

If the left doesn't get their shit together soon it's 4 more years of Trump.

Yup.

[~Rocktar~]

This is fun


https://twitter.com/i/status/1179542037479202816

[~Rocktar~]

Both sides are the big gay right now.

If the left doesn't get their shit together soon it's 4 more years of Trump.

Happy to tell you that unless something else happens, they have pretty much already handed it to Trump and almost gotten Pence elected in 2024.

[Archigeek]

I found it hilarious when he defined what he believes is treason. Lying. Exactly what he does.

Q Thank you, sir. Jeff Mason from Reuters. Mr. President, I’d like to ask you about your use of the word “treason.” You used it repeatedly in the last few days. Do you consider anyone who opposes you treasonous?

PRESIDENT TRUMP: No. No. I consider when they lie; when they stand before our great body in our great chamber, and they make up a story that’s fiction, like Schiff did. He took that perfect conversation I had with the Ukrainian President, and he made it into a total lie. It was a total fabrication. And you do admit that. It was a total fabrication.

He said, “This is what…” — and the only ones that don’t like my conversation are the ones that never read it. But they heard Shifty Schiff. That’s what I call a lie. And because of the fact that he’s — he’s lying about the President of the United States and as to what the President says — you know, I — believe it or not, I watch my words very carefully. There are those that think I’m a very stable genius. Okay? I watch my words very, very closely. And to have somebody get up and to totally fabricate a conversation that I had with another leader and make it sound so bad — it was so evil. And now I see this that just came out minutes ago, where he met at a time that was impossible to have done unless there’s corruption involved.

And just so you know, we’ve been investigating, on a personal basis — through Rudy and others, lawyers — corruption in the 2016 election. We’ve been investigating corruption, because I probably will — I was going to definitely — but I probably will be bringing a lot of litigation against a lot of people having to do with the corrupt investigation, having to do with the 2016 election.

Holy moly. Between that and the Finland thing, Donny went totally off the rails. Lying is treason... hah!

[Tgo01]

So still nothing has happened since Trump fully cooperated with all of the Democrats initial demands?

This is the most boring impeachment ever.

[Neveragain]

So still nothing has happened since Trump fully cooperated with all of the Democrats initial demands?

This is the most boring impeachment ever.

On a positive note, this is a good way to assure that the Federal government will be incapable of getting anything done for the next 50 years. We will have elections and then 4 years of impeachments.

[Tgo01]

On a positive note, this is a good way to assure that the Federal government will be incapable of getting anything done for the next 50 years. We will have elections and then 4 years of impeachments.

Very true.

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

This is fun


https://twitter.com/i/status/1179542037479202816

Wow, who knew Nadler was Cartman.

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

https://stopthemadness.gop/

[Gelston]

Wow, who knew Nadler was Cartman.

Yeah, he lost a lot of weight. A LOT of weight.

[Some Rogue]

I think the real travesty here is that Dump used a meme with fucking Nickelback on twitter.

[Archigeek]

So still nothing has happened since Trump fully cooperated with all of the Democrats initial demands?

This is the most boring impeachment ever.

https://gfycat.com/specificblackandwhitebaiji

[Some Rogue]

It's not like it didn't take the Republicans 2 months to bring their case against Clinton. Keep your panties on Francis.

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

It's not like it didn't take the Republicans 2 months to bring their case against Clinton. Keep your panties on Francis.

Is it heating up? I feel like it's heating up...

[Methais]

The closer we get to impeachment the harder conservatives project.

lol @ this when democrats are in the middle of ultra projection mode with Biden :lol:

If Backlash had minions, it would be you and Seran.

https://media1.tenor.com/images/6db91599aa40fa4d258d865615b4fe09/tenor.gif?itemid=7870358

[Methais]

ONLY 40 PERCENT OF REPUBLICANS BELIEVE TRUMP MENTIONED BIDEN IN UKRAINE CALL, DESPITE TRUMP ADMITTING HE DID
https://www.newsweek.com/40-percent-republicans-believe-trump-mentioned-biden-ukraine-call-1462721

Trump committed an impeachable offense just by threatening Adam Schiff
https://theweek.com/articles/868957/trump-committed-impeachable-offense-just-by-threatening-adam-schiff

Pelosi and Schiff Warn White House: Stonewalling Is a Sign of Guilt
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O0fQhnrdRG4

Trump falsely calls impeachment probe ‘a coup’ designed to strip citizens of rights in wild Twitter tirade
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-impeachment-latest-coup-tweet-democrats-ukraine-call-a9128866.html

Mike Pompeo may be involved in 'blatant cover-up'
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/10/01/ukraine-trump-secretary-of-state-mike-pompeo-may-be-involved-blatant-cover-up-democrats-say/3837338002/

Mike Pompeo was on the Ukraine call
https://edition.cnn.com/2019/10/02/politics/mike-pompeo-ukraine-call/

This is a good one, too:

Armed Militias Are Taking Trump’s Civil War Tweets Seriously
https://www.lawfareblog.com/armed-militias-are-taking-trumps-civil-war-tweets-seriously

It's funny because you still think people read any of your butthurt tard links. You're still gonna hold that L until 2024.


It's the "very stable genius" part that's just pure art. I wonder what people a hundred years from now reading the history books will think of those transcripts.

They'll still be like, "God damn that always triggered Seran guy from that old text game forum was a retard and a half."

[Methais]

It's not like it didn't take the Republicans 2 months to bring their case against Clinton. Keep your panties on Francis.

Democrats been at it for almost 4 years now.

BUT THEY SHOULD HAVE HIM ANY MINUTE NOW THOUGH, FOR SUPER DUPER REAL THIS TIME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

EDIT: 4th post, I MUST BE SO SUPER FLIBBITY FLOBBITY MAAAAAADDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1111h

[Parkbandit]

Both sides are the big gay right now.

If the left doesn't get their shit together soon it's 4 more years of Trump.

To be fair.. this IS the left getting their shit together.

They can't campaign on their real end goal of socialism, because they wouldn't get very many votes. So they have to pretend they are trying to help (insert victim group here) because Trump won't.

I hope Elizabeth Warren is their candidate.. it'll be a landslide.

That bitch be cray cray.

[Methais]

To be fair.. this IS the left getting their shit together.

They can't campaign on their real end goal of socialism, because they wouldn't get very many votes. So they have to pretend they are trying to help (insert victim group here) because Trump won't.

This is correct.

https://i.imgflip.com/30dcww.jpg

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

I don't trust people who don't shave their upper cheeks.

[Alfster]

This whole thing gets more bizarre every day. Manafort resurfacing, some mysterious package of conspiracy theories that guiliani admits he created...with fake letterhead to look like it came from the Whitehouse.

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

This whole thing gets more bizarre every day. Manafort resurfacing, some mysterious package of conspiracy theories that guiliani admits he created...with fake letterhead to look like it came from the Whitehouse.

I heard about the box of stuff with whitehouse letterhead, didn't know Guilliani admitted to creating it.

If I was Trump, I'd create fake accusations every day just to prove the media would bite on all of them.

[Methais]

If I was Trump, I'd create fake accusations every day just to prove the media would bite on all of them.

Plot twist: Trump was the Ukraine whistleblower

[Alfster]

The packet had a return address that matched that of the Manhattan office of Giuliani, who later confirmed that he was responsible for their production, telling The New York Times they came from a “professional investigator who works for my company.”

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

The packet had a return address that matched that of the Manhattan office of Giuliani, who later confirmed that he was responsible for their production, telling The New York Times they came from a “professional investigator who works for my company.”

I only ever liked Giuliani during 9/11. Before and after I always thought he was a blowhard. Under Trump he's even more ridiculous.

edit to say - by 9/11 I'm mean his response to it. He was present and doing shit.

[Alfster]

Yup. Agreed. His role seems to be what the whistleblower called out, which is a non government employee with no security clearances pushing the agenda for the administration through back channels, while continuing to work with manafort. I'm not sure that's a fact yet - but there's a lot of reporting about it today.

[Methais]

Democrats 2020 strategy:

https://media.giphy.com/media/dBkvXI0SATjHkrAevu/giphy.gif

[Alfster]

My money is on Bolton being the whistleblower.

[Methais]

My money is on Bolton being the whistleblower.

https://media1.tenor.com/images/197b4b5b0d9da9459a854c339d57591b/tenor.gif?itemid=5696174

[Seran]

The packet had a return address that matched that of the Manhattan office of Giuliani, who later confirmed that he was responsible for their production, telling The New York Times they came from a “professional investigator who works for my company.”

Everyday that man becomes more and more a snake oil salesman.

[Parkbandit]

My money is on Bolton being the whistleblower.

https://media0.giphy.com/media/l3q2UdX8HREZi35gA/giphy.gif

[Tgo01]

It's not like it didn't take the Republicans 2 months to bring their case against Clinton. Keep your panties on Francis.

We were constantly learning more and more about Clinton’s misdeeds and trying to get people to not cooperate and shit. So far we have the fake whistleblower was wrong on just about everything and the Democrats’ original claim for impeachment has already been destroyed. What exactly is left to investigate? At this point Democrats are just using this false whistleblower complaint as an excuse to go on a fishing expedition in the hopes of finding something or going to accuse Trump of a coverup. You really should stop being so gullible, leave that for the liberal elites.

[Some Rogue]

Clinton was charged with lying under oath. "Constantly learning about his misdeeds" LMAO

And they couldn't even convict on that. That is a pretty cut and dried thing to figure out. You want to talk gullible though? You believe every lie Trump and Rudy come up with and spit it back out like a good little boy. Hell, Trump is digging himself deeper every single day because he is so triggered. They need to just let him hang himself. Little snowflake Trump needs a safe space I guess. He is getting bullied! Poor little guy.

[Seran]

9422

[Alfster]

We were constantly learning more and more about Clinton’s misdeeds and trying to get people to not cooperate and shit. So far we have the fake whistleblower was wrong on just about everything and the Democrats’ original claim for impeachment has already been destroyed. What exactly is left to investigate? At this point Democrats are just using this false whistleblower complaint as an excuse to go on a fishing expedition in the hopes of finding something or going to accuse Trump of a coverup. You really should stop being so gullible, leave that for the liberal elites.

You're precisely the type of person that foxnews was created for. Holy batshit conspiracy theory.

Fake whistleblower.
Whistleblower wrong.
Called out Clinton.

Lol. You should have added in fake news. You do realize you're the exact same retard as backlash right? Just your the other spectrum.

[Tgo01]

Clinton was charged with lying under oath. "Constantly learning about his misdeeds" LMAO

You think that’s the only thing the investigation revealed?

[Tgo01]

You're precisely the type of person that foxnews was created for. Holy batshit conspiracy theory.

Fake whistleblower.
Whistleblower wrong.
Called out Clinton.

Lol. You should have added in fake news. You do realize you're the exact same retard as backlash right? Just your the other spectrum.

Whistle blower was wrong. They said aid was mentioned in the call and there was a specific quid pro quo, both of which were wrong.

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

You think that’s the only thing the investigation revealed?

It boiled down to that, yes. It was the republican version of what's happening today to Trump.

[Tgo01]

It boiled down to that, yes. It was the republican version of what's happening today to Trump.

That’s what he was charged with. The investigation uncovered all of the women he assaulted too.

[Parkbandit]

You're precisely the type of person that foxnews was created for. Holy batshit conspiracy theory.

Fake whistleblower.
Whistleblower wrong.
Called out Clinton.

Lol. You should have added in fake news. You do realize you're the exact same retard as backlash right? Just your the other spectrum.

And you're on the same spectrum as Backlash... which should tell you something...

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

https://www.wsj.com/articles/schiffs-shifty-timeline-11570143046

This is all the reasons why Schiff screwed himself and his credibility.

"Mr. Schiff on Sept. 13, a Friday night, issued the explosive news that he had been alerted a few days earlier by the intelligence community’s inspector general of an “urgent” yet unspecified whistleblower complaint. But the complaint is dated Aug. 12, and news reports now say the whistleblower interacted with Mr. Schiff’s staff prior to then. So Mr. Schiff knew about the topic of the complaint for more than a month—while the public did not. It is now clear why the intelligence chairman in that month suddenly developed an interest in all things Ukrainian, and began aggressively previewing his impeachment mantra.

On Aug. 23, for instance, Mr. Schiff tweeted that Mr. Trump tried to “get dirt on a political opponent” via personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani’s interaction with the office of the Ukrainian president. On Aug. 28, the chairman tweeted his newfound concern that Mr. Trump was “withholding vital military aid to Ukraine.” And on Sept. 9, Mr. Schiff suddenly announced his committee would launch a full-fledged investigation into whether Mr. Trump was trying to “pressure Ukraine to help the President’s re-election campaign.” All this was priming the public and the media for what was to come—the better to take full advantage of the whistleblower “news.”

Yet even after news broke of the complaint, Mr. Schiff played dumb. On Sept. 17, he flatly (and falsely) stated on MSNBC: “We have not spoken directly with the whistleblower.” Two days later, he thanked the inspector general, Michael Atkinson, without whom “we might not have even known there was a whistleblower complaint.” Really? Mr. Schiff wanted to make it sound as if the Trump administration was muzzling the complainant, when in fact the process was working and Mr. Schiff knew all about it."

[Seran]

So the fact a member of Congress was aware of a whistleblower complaint somehow invalidates the acts being reported by the whistleblower? No, I didn't think so.

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

So the fact a member of Congress was aware of a whistleblower complaint somehow invalidates the acts being reported by the whistleblower? No, I didn't think so.

He crafted the narrative. I said nothing of the validity of the report you blind partisan fuck.

[Seran]

By promoting and article which furthers the false narrative that the whistleblower complaint is a political hack job, you're doing exactly that. You're about as objective as Giuliani in that regard.

[Parkbandit]

By promoting and article which furthers the false narrative that the whistleblower complaint is a political hack job, you're doing exactly that. You're about as objective as Giuliani in that regard.

And you're being as objective as Adam Schiff4Brains at this point.

We got the transcript of the call.. turned out that the whistle blower that received 2nd hand information was at the very least uninformed and incorrect...

BUT ZOMG WE MUST BELIEVE EVERY COMPLAINT BECAUSE ORANGE MAN BAD!!!!!!!!

[Methais]

By promoting and article which furthers the false narrative that the whistleblower complaint is a political hack job, you're doing exactly that. You're about as objective as Giuliani in that regard.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/schiffs-shifty-timeline-11570143046

This is all the reasons why Schiff screwed himself and his credibility.

"Mr. Schiff on Sept. 13, a Friday night, issued the explosive news that he had been alerted a few days earlier by the intelligence community’s inspector general of an “urgent” yet unspecified whistleblower complaint. But the complaint is dated Aug. 12, and news reports now say the whistleblower interacted with Mr. Schiff’s staff prior to then. So Mr. Schiff knew about the topic of the complaint for more than a month—while the public did not. It is now clear why the intelligence chairman in that month suddenly developed an interest in all things Ukrainian, and began aggressively previewing his impeachment mantra.

On Aug. 23, for instance, Mr. Schiff tweeted that Mr. Trump tried to “get dirt on a political opponent” via personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani’s interaction with the office of the Ukrainian president. On Aug. 28, the chairman tweeted his newfound concern that Mr. Trump was “withholding vital military aid to Ukraine.” And on Sept. 9, Mr. Schiff suddenly announced his committee would launch a full-fledged investigation into whether Mr. Trump was trying to “pressure Ukraine to help the President’s re-election campaign.” All this was priming the public and the media for what was to come—the better to take full advantage of the whistleblower “news.”

Yet even after news broke of the complaint, Mr. Schiff played dumb. On Sept. 17, he flatly (and falsely) stated on MSNBC: “We have not spoken directly with the whistleblower.” Two days later, he thanked the inspector general, Michael Atkinson, without whom “we might not have even known there was a whistleblower complaint.” Really? Mr. Schiff wanted to make it sound as if the Trump administration was muzzling the complainant, when in fact the process was working and Mr. Schiff knew all about it."

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

Man the Taylor texts to Sondland literally look like a trap - and Sondland deftly decimated the trap in his responses.

[Methais]

Man the Taylor texts to Sondland literally look like a trap - and Sondland deftly decimated the trap in his responses.

more details required plzszszszszszszs

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/context/read-the-documents-house-democrats-letter-on-state-department-texts/2b855855-423b-48e7-b2cf-b67c3440e283/
https://www.npr.org/2019/10/04/767080125/texts-show-top-u-s-diplomat-in-ukraine-concerned-over-possible-quid-pro-quo

In one exchange dated Sept. 9, in a text Taylor sent to Sondland, the career diplomat says: "I think it's crazy to withhold security assistance for help with a political campaign."
Sondland responds: "Bill, I believe you are incorrect about President Trump's intentions. The President has been crystal clear no quid pro quo's of any kind."
Sondland continues, "I suggest we stop the back and forth by text."

"“Bill, I believe you are incorrect about President Trump’s intentions,” Sondland wrote. “The President has been crystal clear no quid pro quo’s of any kind. The President is trying to evaluate whether Ukraine is truly going to adopt the transparency and reforms that President Zelensky promised during his campaign.”Then Trump’s ambassador to the E.U. said that they should “stop the back and forth by text.”
“If you still have concerns,” Sondland added curtly, Taylor should call “S” – which is how people in the department refer to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo – or Lisa Kenna (https://www.state.gov/biographies/lisa-d-kenna/), one of the secretary’s top aides. “Thanks.”"

[Methais]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/context/read-the-documents-house-democrats-letter-on-state-department-texts/2b855855-423b-48e7-b2cf-b67c3440e283/
https://www.npr.org/2019/10/04/767080125/texts-show-top-u-s-diplomat-in-ukraine-concerned-over-possible-quid-pro-quo

In one exchange dated Sept. 9, in a text Taylor sent to Sondland, the career diplomat says: "I think it's crazy to withhold security assistance for help with a political campaign."
Sondland responds: "Bill, I believe you are incorrect about President Trump's intentions. The President has been crystal clear no quid pro quo's of any kind."
Sondland continues, "I suggest we stop the back and forth by text."

"“Bill, I believe you are incorrect about President Trump’s intentions,” Sondland wrote. “The President has been crystal clear no quid pro quo’s of any kind. The President is trying to evaluate whether Ukraine is truly going to adopt the transparency and reforms that President Zelensky promised during his campaign.”Then Trump’s ambassador to the E.U. said that they should “stop the back and forth by text.”
“If you still have concerns,” Sondland added curtly, Taylor should call “S” – which is how people in the department refer to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo – or Lisa Kenna (https://www.state.gov/biographies/lisa-d-kenna/), one of the secretary’s top aides. “Thanks.”"

In before HE KNEW ABOUT THIS TRAP BEFOREHAND AND WAS COVERING FOR TRUMP WE NEED LOGS OF EVERY TEXT HE'S EVER SENT TO ANYONE IN THE HISTORY OF TEXT MESSAGING OTHERWISE THIS IS PROOF TRUMP IS CORRUPT!!!!!!!!!!111

[ClydeR]

About those ellipses in the transcript..


The call between Trump and Zelensky measured at about 65 words per minute. Transcripts of Trump’s calls have been released in the past. A 24-minute call with then-Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull came in at 133 words per minute, while a 53-minute call with then-Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto, using interpreters, clocked in at 102 words per minute.

More... (https://www.salon.com/2019/10/03/how-much-is-missing-from-ukraine-transcript-former-officials-point-to-ellipses-odd-markings/)

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

LOL @ Salon doing WPM analysis. LMFAO

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

https://looker.com/assets/img/images/blog/2019/04/gender_in_got/1.png

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

https://virtualspeech.com/img/blog/words-per-minute-popular-ted-talks-wpm-average.jpg

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

https://infinitemind.io/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Average-Words-Per-Minute.jpg

All the above are conclusive proof of russian collusion, obstruction of justice, high crimes and misdemeanors, popular vote versus electoral vote, racism, sexism and whatever else the soy boys on the left have thrown at trump for 3 years.

[Methais]

About those ellipses in the transcript..

This is taking butthurt to a whole new level holy fuck :lol:

https://media2.giphy.com/media/dJ1VnD0nKus48/giphy.gif

[Tgo01]

About those ellipses in the transcript..


The length of the call has also been called into question. The document claims to summarize a 30-minute call but Sen. Angus King, I-Maine, told CNN that staffers in his office read the exchange out loud and clocked it at under 11 minutes, nearly 20 minutes shorter than the length described by the document.

This is crazy right? It's not just me?

This is the type of thing a 10 year old thinks up to prove how smart they are. But it's not a 10 year old. It's our elected officials conducting "investigations" into probably the most serious matter in the entire world: impeaching a sitting US president.

I guess I can't fully blame our elected officials because our media are willingly playing along with this shit. Imagine seriously publishing this in your news article instead of pushing back and saying "Dude are you serious?"

[Tgo01]

This entire thing just looks like a complete setup.

So there was a new "bombshell" in this aid bullshit in which there were text messages shared between a senior diplomat to Ukraine and someone else.

Said diplomat Bill Taylor said: "As I said on the phone, I think it's crazy to withhold security assistance for help with a political campaign."

The left went nuts! "PROOF THERE WAS A QUID PRO QUO RIGHT THERE! THIS PERSON HEARD IT FIRST!"

Not only did the person in texts spell out in no uncertain terms that there was no quid pro quo, but Democrats were making it sound like Bill Taylor had first hand knowledge of the supposed quid pro quo, only problem is that narrative is completely false.

Turns out Taylor's "knowledge" of a supposed quid pro quo was an article he read in Politico. That article was written by Natasha Bertrand, someone who has been pushing one Trump conspiracy theory after another.

This is all just too much bullshit to digest for a Friday evening.

[Methais]

https://infinitemind.io/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Average-Words-Per-Minute.jpg

All the above are conclusive proof of russian collusion, obstruction of justice, high crimes and misdemeanors, popular vote versus electoral vote, racism, sexism and whatever else the soy boys on the left have thrown at trump for 3 years.

What about the Micro Machines guy?

[Back]

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/2nd-whistleblower-forward-speaking-ig-attorney/story?id=66092396&cid=clicksource_77_null_bsq_hed


Mark Zaid, the attorney representing the whistleblower who sounded the alarm on President Donald Trump's dealings with Ukraine and triggered an impeachment inquiry, tells ABC News that he is now representing a second whistleblower who has spoken with the inspector general.

Zaid tells ABC News' Chief Anchor George Stephanopoulos that the second person -- also described as an intelligence official -- has first-hand knowledge of some of the allegations outlined in the original complaint and has been interviewed by the head of the intelligence community's internal watchdog office, Michael Atkinson.

The existence of a second whistleblower -- particularly one who can speak directly about events involving the president related to conversations involving Ukraine -- could undercut Trump's repeated insistence that the original complaint, released on Sept. 26, was "totally inaccurate."

Looks like the Deep State is going to produce whatever it is they need for the coup against Trump. Then they can install Hillary, make everyone drive Priuses instead of flying, eliminate hamburgers from the face of the Earth, remove all borders, and have a big multi-gender orgy. AMIRITE?

[Tgo01]

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/2nd-whistleblower-forward-speaking-ig-attorney/story?id=66092396&cid=clicksource_77_null_bsq_hed



Looks like the Deep State is going to produce whatever it is they need for the coup against Trump. Then they can install Hillary, make everyone drive Priuses instead of flying, eliminate hamburgers from the face of the Earth, remove all borders, and have a big multi-gender orgy. AMIRITE?

Finally Back makes sense.

[Tgo01]

Come on now, Back, even someone like you can surely see this is starting to look like complete bullshit.

"Whistleblower" with third and fourth hand information comes forward with accusations that are mostly false. The whistleblower spoke with top Democrats in the House prior to coming forward. Democrats say it's bad shit and demand transcripts of the phone call, expecting Trump to deny the request and using that as further evidence that Trump is corrupt.

Instead Trump complies with the demand, the transcript shows the whistleblower is mostly wrong, Democrats immediately move on to the next talking point that the transcript isn't important, Adam Schiff realizes the whistleblower complaint is such shit that he has to literally make up what Trump said in the transcript to make Trump look as bad as possible and John Brennan practically begs more "whistleblowers" to come forward and wouldn't you know it? More "whistleblowers" come forward.

Even someone of your limited intelligence has to admit this all seems rather suspect, even if you don't want to flat out admit it's all bullshit.

[Back]

Come on now, Back, even someone like you can surely see this is starting to look like complete bullshit.

"Whistleblower" with third and fourth hand information comes forward with accusations that are mostly false. The whistleblower spoke with top Democrats in the House prior to coming forward. Democrats say it's bad shit and demand transcripts of the phone call, expecting Trump to deny the request and using that as further evidence that Trump is corrupt.

Instead Trump complies with the demand, the transcript shows the whistleblower is mostly wrong, Democrats immediately move on to the next talking point that the transcript isn't important, Adam Schiff realizes the whistleblower complaint is such shit that he has to literally make up what Trump said in the transcript to make Trump look as bad as possible and John Brennan practically begs more "whistleblowers" to come forward and wouldn't you know it? More "whistleblowers" come forward.

Even someone of your limited intelligence has to admit this all seems rather suspect, even if you don't want to flat out admit it's all bullshit.

The only thing suspect is Trump's patriotism in asking a foreign government to investigate an American political rival.

Trump has full disposal of the American intelligence apparatus to investigate anything he wants yet he asks a transitioning Ukranian government and the adversarial government of China to investigate. Trump is ready to believe these foreign governments over his own intelligence agencies like when Putin told him he didn't meddle.

Watch the republicans in the Senate abandon Trump when the trial comes.

[Tgo01]

The only thing suspect is Trump's patriotism in asking a foreign government to investigate an American political rival.

So people running for president can't be investigated for possible crimes? What about people who are currently president?


Trump has full disposal of the American intelligence apparatus to investigate anything he wants yet he asks a transitioning Ukranian government and the adversarial government of China to investigate.

Pretty sure Barr is looking into some of this shit too. Does that make you feel better?

[Back]

So people running for president can't be investigated for possible crimes? What about people who are currently president?

Trump is targeting the Bidens for political gain. Don't be naive.

Are you ready to state here for the record that you would approve of the next Democratic president asking any foreign government to investigate any of Trump's children's dealings without any evidence whatsoever of wrongdoing?

[Tgo01]

Trump is targeting the Bidens for political gain. Don't be naive.

And the endless stream of butthurt Democrats aren't targeting Trump for political gain?

So the endless nonsense and endless investigations into Trump is seeking justice, but just the mere mention of investigating Biden or any Democrat is "targeting for political gain"? Do I understand the fucked up brain that is Back?


Are you ready to state here for the record that you would approve of the next Democratic president asking any foreign government to investigate any of Trump's children's dealings without any evidence whatsoever of wrongdoing?

Without any evidence? Absolutely not. Biden BRAGGED ON VIDEO about withholding money until Ukraine fired the prosecutor investigating the company his son worked for. Doesn't that at least warrant an investigation? No? But third and fourth hand hearsay warrants an impeachment? This is too much even for you, Back.

[Alfster]

Come on now, Back, even someone like you can surely see this is starting to look like complete bullshit.

"Whistleblower" with third and fourth hand information comes forward with accusations that are mostly false. The whistleblower spoke with top Democrats in the House prior to coming forward. Democrats say it's bad shit and demand transcripts of the phone call, expecting Trump to deny the request and using that as further evidence that Trump is corrupt.

Instead Trump complies with the demand, the transcript shows the whistleblower is mostly wrong, Democrats immediately move on to the next talking point that the transcript isn't important, Adam Schiff realizes the whistleblower complaint is such shit that he has to literally make up what Trump said in the transcript to make Trump look as bad as possible and John Brennan practically begs more "whistleblowers" to come forward and wouldn't you know it? More "whistleblowers" come forward.

Even someone of your limited intelligence has to admit this all seems rather suspect, even if you don't want to flat out admit it's all bullshit.

You're world is one of the most willful ignorant ones out there. Jesus dude, you're full in on all th propoganda and too stupid to notice.

You're missing major pieces here, but Breitbart and fox won't show you those. You cry about fake news, then intentionally position yourself to only believe your safe spaces.

[Back]

And the endless stream of butthurt Democrats aren't targeting Trump for political gain?

Trump should be investigated because he has not been forthcoming about anything to the point of obstruction over a so-called witch hunt. If there were nothing to hide he would not be trying so hard to hide things. Wouldn't the best way to say "shut up democrats" be to show them everything to prove there is nothing there? Instead Trump has gone out of his way to obstruct the Mueller investigation from start to finish.

That investigation did find that Russia meddled in our election and that Trump could be arrested as soon as he leaves office. Trump was the one who benefited from the meddling, Trump's operatives met with Russians in Trump tower and lied about it, Trump asked the Russians to hack the DNC emails and they did.


So the endless nonsense and endless investigations into Trump is seeking justice, but just the mere mention of investigating Biden or any Democrat is "targeting for political gain"? Do I understand the fucked up brain that is Back?

Except the investigation into Trump includes him obstructing American lawmakers while the Bidens have been cleared of any wrongdoing already. The investigation into Trump is by Americans. Trump is asking foreign governments to investigate a political rival and his son.


Without any evidence? Absolutely not. Biden BRAGGED ON VIDEO about withholding money until Ukraine fired the prosecutor investigating the company his son worked for.

Biden bragged about being a part of the reason a corrupt Ukrainian prosecutor was fired, who was not investigating his son but the owner of the company his son was on the board of, and that allies in the EU also thought that prosecutor should go.


Doesn't that at least warrant an investigation? No? But third and fourth hand hearsay warrants an impeachment? This is too much even for you, Back.

Its much more than third and fourth hand hearsay at this point. You should check some other sources of information than those who are trying to deceive you into believing your enemies are other Americans.

[Tgo01]

You're world is one of the most willful ignorant ones out there. Jesus dude, you're full in on all th propoganda and too stupid to notice.

Just tell me what I'm wrong about. You always do this, just post vague nonsense about how I'm always wrong and watch Fox News or something. Put up or shut the fuck up and get off deez nuts already.

[Tgo01]

If there were nothing to hide he would not be trying so hard to hide things.

Talk about irony.


while the Bidens have been cleared of any wrongdoing already.

Whom exactly cleared the Bidens of any wrongdoing? Have a link handy?

[~Rocktar~]

I love this, there is a ABC video where they have Rep Hakeen Jeffries spewing the company line about if Trum has done nothing wrong, why does he keep hiding things. Lack of transparency doesn't mean you committed a crime. Not talking to a government investigator does not mean guilt. I love this BS. This is Joseph Goebbels at his finest.

[Back]

Whom exactly cleared the Bidens of any wrongdoing? Have a link handy?

There is stuff out there.

Here is one good link that debunks the claim.

https://theintercept.com/2019/05/10/rumors-joe-biden-scandal-ukraine-absolute-nonsense-reformer-says/

[Tgo01]

There is stuff out there.

Here is one good link that debunks the claim.

https://theintercept.com/2019/05/10/rumors-joe-biden-scandal-ukraine-absolute-nonsense-reformer-says/

I was going to read the entire article but that's a lot of nonsense to sift through. I did get through the first few paragraphs and I can't help but notice not a single formal investigation was mentioned at all. Is there one mentioned later in the article that you can quote for me?

Or is it when it comes to Biden we can rely on "an American-educated lawyer who founded Ukraine’s Anti-Corruption Action Center" to clear not only Joe Biden but also his son, but when it comes to Trump we need endless investigations which cost the American taxpayers tens of millions of dollars?

[Back]

I was going to read the entire article but that's a lot of nonsense to sift through. I did get through the first few paragraphs and I can't help but notice not a single formal investigation was mentioned at all. Is there one mentioned later in the article that you can quote for me?

To investigate what? That the vice president was doing his job?


Or is it when it comes to Biden we can rely on "an American-educated lawyer who founded Ukraine’s Anti-Corruption Action Center" to clear not only Joe Biden but also his son, but when it comes to Trump we need endless investigations which cost the American taxpayers tens of millions of dollars?

Yes but only because there are obvious signs that Trump has obstructed an official investigation here in America, sought assistance from an adversarial foreign government in the 2016 election, and has now openly asked for more from Ukraine and China. And thats just in the top 5 things Trump has done to undermine the American government. Remember, Trump has said believes Putin over our own intelligence community.

[Tgo01]

To investigate what? That the vice president was doing his job?

To investigate a possible quid pro quo on Joe Biden's part? To investigate if there was some corruption going on with his son receiving so much money for doing nothing?

I'm sure if one of Trump's children was given a cushy job in a foreign country they weren't qualified for and were paid very well you would just say "Sounds okay" right?


Yes but only because there are obvious signs that Trump has obstructed an official investigation here in America, sought assistance from an adversarial foreign government in the 2016 election, and has now openly asked for more from Ukraine and China.

And Joe Biden's son was kicked out of the military because he couldn't get enough cocaine, was almost immediately given a high paying job he isn't qualified for in another country, said company was then being investigated for corruption then Joe Biden literally bragged about how he threatened withhold aid to said country unless they fired the prosecutor investigating said company. And that doesn't even warrant a formal investigation? What's wrong, Back, afraid there might be even more evidence that Joe Biden and Obama were corrupt? If Joe Biden has nothing to hide he should welcome an investigation. Isn't that what leftists such as yourself said about Trump and Kavanaugh? Funny how that goes right out the window when it involves a Democrat.

[Back]

To investigate a possible quid pro quo on Joe Biden's part? To investigate if there was some corruption going on with his son receiving so much money for doing nothing?

I'm sure if one of Trump's children was given a cushy job in a foreign country they weren't qualified for and were paid very well you would just say "Sounds okay" right?

If everything us above board, yep, I would. Do you think it will be ok for the next democrat president to ask a foreign country to investigate Trump's children? You're crazy if you do.


And Joe Biden's son was kicked out of the military because he couldn't get enough cocaine, was almost immediately given a high paying job he isn't qualified for in another country, said company was then being investigated for corruption then Joe Biden literally bragged about how he threatened withhold aid to said country unless they fired the prosecutor investigating said country. And that doesn't even warrant a formal investigation? What's wrong, Back, afraid there might be even more evidence that Joe Biden and Obama were corrupt? If Joe Biden has nothing to hide he should welcome an investigation. Isn't that what leftists such as yourself said about Trump and Kavanaugh? Funny how that goes right out the window when it involves a Democrat.

Your lack of wanting to read more is the issue. You would have seen that the prosecutor was investigating the owner of that company before Hunter was hired and that investigation was on hold when Joe pressured them to fire the prosecutor because the prosecutor was not doing enough to investigate corruption in the first place.

[Tgo01]

If everything us above board, yep, I would.

What exactly do you consider "above board"?


Do you think it will be ok for the next democrat president to ask a foreign country to investigate Trump's children? You're crazy if you do.

If they were profiting off of nothing but the fact that their father was the president? Yeah I would be fine with that. Look, Back, I would have no problem if Hunter Biden had a long history of being paid 50k a month for being a consultant or whatever his bogus job title was. But you don't think it's just a tad fishy that he goes from being kicked out of the military because he loved drugs so much to right into being paid 50k a month in a foreign firm where he didn't even have to show up to work or anything? That instantly passes the sniff test for you?


You would have seen that the prosecutor was investigating the owner of that company before Hunter was hired and that investigation was on hold when Joe pressured them to fire the prosecutor because the prosecutor was not doing enough to investigate corruption in the first place.

No one ever said the investigation started BECAUSE of Hunter Biden or anything. If anything the fact that the prosecutor was investigating this company before Hunter Biden was hired and was then forced to resign after Hunter Biden was hired just makes this all look much worse.

[Back]

http://forum.gsplayers.com/images/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by Backhttp://forum.gsplayers.com/images/buttons/viewpost-right.png (http://forum.gsplayers.com/showthread.php?p=2121769#post2121769)Do you think it will be ok for the next democrat president to ask a foreign country to investigate Trump's children? You're crazy if you do.
If they were profiting off of nothing but the fact that their father was the president? Yeah I would be fine with that.

You're crazy. And really, while going after your political opponent's children isn't illegal, its a garbage move.

[Tgo01]

You're crazy. And really, while going after your political opponent's children isn't illegal, its a garbage move.

Again you don't think it's a tad fishy that Hunter Biden went straight from being kicked out of the military for failing drug tests to landing a cushy 50k a month job in Ukraine where he doesn't even have to show up for work? That seems normal to you and doesn't sound like corruption?

Can you name one other person in the history of the world who has managed to do the same?

[Gelston]

Biden literally bragged about blackmailing the Ukraine. You people will go at Trump for anything.

[Back]

Again you don't think it's a tad fishy that Hunter Biden went straight from being kicked out of the military for failing drug tests to landing a cushy 50k a month job in Ukraine where he doesn't even have to show up for work? That seems normal to you and doesn't sound like corruption?

Can you name one other person in the history of the world who has managed to do the same?

If its anything it may be nepotism but there is no evidence of that and nepotism in business is not necessarily corrupt. People get friends and family jobs all the time. Its pretty common. If Joe directly appointed Hunter to a job in the US government with a huge salary that would be an issue of corrupt nepotism.

[Back]

Biden literally bragged about blackmailing the Ukraine. You people will go at Trump for anything.

That wasn't blackmail, it was out in the open, and it had support from Obama, the EU, the IMF, and others for the benefit of fighting corruption in Ukraine.

[Tgo01]

If its anything it may be nepotism but there is no evidence of that and nepotism in business is not necessarily corrupt. People get friends and family jobs all the time. Its pretty common. If Joe directly appointed Hunter to a job in the US government with a huge salary that would be an issue of corrupt nepotism.

So nepotism in politics in suddenly okay now?

Shit the left had a fit when Trump appointed his daughter and son-in-law to unpaid positions within his cabinet, but they are perfectly fine with Biden using his influence to secure a high paying job for his son for which he is not qualified for. Yup. No corruption going on here!


That wasn't blackmail, it was out in the open, and it had support from Obama, the EU, the IMF, and others for the benefit of fighting corruption in Ukraine.

Fine, extortion, that work out better for ya?

[Back]

So nepotism in politics in suddenly okay now?

Shit the left had a fit when Trump appointed his daughter and son-in-law to unpaid positions within his cabinet, but they are perfectly fine with Biden using his influence to secure a high paying job for his son for which he is not qualified for. Yup. No corruption going on here!

Fine, extortion, that work out better for ya?

You're not reading what I post and purposely misrepresenting my points. Thats always been your issue. I'm still here as usual trying to tell you to stop listening to the people who are telling you that your fellow Americans are your enemy. The real enemies are outside of America. In my opinion corruption from Russia has seeped into our and others politics.

[Tgo01]

You're not reading what I post and purposely misrepresenting my points. Thats always been your issue. I'm still here as usual trying to tell you to stop listening to the people who are telling you that your fellow Americans are your enemy. The real enemies are outside of America. In my opinion corruption from Russia has seeped into our and others politics.

Are you pulling an Alfter now and just telling me I'm wrong without citing specifics and saying I should just trust you on this?

[Gelston]

That wasn't blackmail, it was out in the open, and it had support from Obama, the EU, the IMF, and others for the benefit of fighting corruption in Ukraine.

You're an idiot.

[Astray]

You're an idiot.

We all knew that but he keeps reiterating it.

[Ashlander]

We all knew that but he keeps reiterating it.

It is what he's best at.

[Tgo01]

Barr must be close to dropping some major shit all over Democrats because they are now trying to have his license to practice law revoked.

But I'm sure Back et al will have some inane reason why this is perfectly acceptable.

[RichardCranium]

That wasn't blackmail, it was out in the open, and it had support from Obama, the EU, the IMF, and others for the benefit of fighting corruption in Ukraine.

Spin city.

[Seran]

And Joe Biden's son was kicked out of the military because he couldn't get enough cocaine, was almost immediately given a high paying job he isn't qualified for in another country, said company was then being investigated for corruption then Joe Biden literally bragged about how he threatened withhold aid to said country unless they fired the prosecutor investigating said company. And that doesn't even warrant a formal investigation? What's wrong, Back, afraid there might be even more evidence that Joe Biden and Obama were corrupt? If Joe Biden has nothing to hide he should welcome an investigation. Isn't that what leftists such as yourself said about Trump and Kavanaugh? Funny how that goes right out the window when it involves a Democrat.

George W Bush also had a cocaine problem prior to becoming President, but he still became president. So what is exactly your point? You're citing all sorts of allegations, which is exactly what this impeachment inquiry is all about, the Democrats investigating allegations.

[Tgo01]

George W Bush also had a cocaine problem prior to becoming President, but he still became president.

My point isn't that Hunter Biden is a bad person for doing drugs so you can stop with the deflections right there.

[Wrathbringer]

You're not reading what I post and purposely misrepresenting my points. Thats always been your issue. I'm still here as usual trying to tell you to stop listening to me because I'm a completely retarded retard.

Fixed.

[Parkbandit]

In response to all of Backlash's herpin and derpin:

https://media3.giphy.com/media/rYlRc4uf1dcLC/giphy.gif?cid=790b761199ffef734d2f53a0eb46e488a96f ef452b1ee42f&rid=giphy.gif

Dude.. stop.

NO ONE IS EVEN ON YOUR LEVEL! There isn't a challenger to your belt anywhere.

You don't have go all out and link sites like The Intercept to prove how fucking stupid you are.

We all know.

[Methais]

All kinds of stupid retarded Backlash bullshit

It's ok to be stupid, just don't brag about it.

[Back]

In response to all of Backlash's herpin and derpin:

Dude.. stop.

NO ONE IS EVEN ON YOUR LEVEL! There isn't a challenger to your belt anywhere.

You don't have go all out and link sites like The Intercept to prove how fucking stupid you are.

We all know.

Yet I'm not the one defending a sitting president who sends foreign governments after his own citizens.

https://media3.giphy.com/media/rYlRc4uf1dcLC/giphy.gif?cid=790b761199ffef734d2f53a0eb46e488a96f ef452b1ee42f&rid=giphy.gif

[Methais]

Yet I'm not the one defending a sitting president who sends foreign governments after his own citizens.

https://media3.giphy.com/media/rYlRc4uf1dcLC/giphy.gif?cid=790b761199ffef734d2f53a0eb46e488a96f ef452b1ee42f&rid=giphy.gif

How did you become this retarded? What happened to you growing up? Were your parents raging hippies? Head injury? Something had to have happened.

[Seran]

My point isn't that Hunter Biden is a bad person for doing drugs so you can stop with the deflections right there.

No, your point is somehow trying to tie in alleged drug use with incompetency and corruption. All without any evidence or source. Fact is you cannot use your position of authority and power to punish or investigate your rivals on behalf of your re-election campaign. Nixon learned that, yet our current pay for play president hasn't learned his lesson.

[Parkbandit]

Yet I'm not the one defending a sitting president who sends foreign governments after his own citizens.

https://media3.giphy.com/media/rYlRc4uf1dcLC/giphy.gif?cid=790b761199ffef734d2f53a0eb46e488a96f ef452b1ee42f&rid=giphy.gif

No, you're the gullible useful idiot that believes everything he is told by one side of the political spectrum and plugs his ears and screams to the top of his lungs when it's found out that it was just a lie.

How'd that Russian collusion "investigation" work out for you? What about the Kavanaugh Hearings?

I'd say you should live by the "Fool me once, shame on you.. fool me twice, shame on me" idiom.. but you literally STILL believe their lies even after they are proven false.

Which is why, you are the Reigning, Defending, Undisputed Retard Champion of the World.

At least you are good at something though, right?

[Methais]

No, you're the gullible useful idiot that believes everything he is told by one side of the political spectrum and plugs his ears and screams to the top of his lungs when it's found out that it was just a lie.

How'd that Russian collusion "investigation" work out for you? What about the Kavanaugh Hearings?

I'd say you should live by the "Fool me once, shame on you.. fool me twice, shame on me" idiom.. but you literally STILL believe their lies even after they are proven false.

Which is why, you are the Reigning, Defending, Undisputed Retard Champion of the World.

At least you are good at something though, right?

In before "I STILL BELIEVE TRUMP COLLUDED WITH RUSSIA AND KAVANAUGH IS A PROVEN RAPIST!!!!!!!11"

[Parkbandit]

In before "I STILL BELIEVE TRUMP COLLUDED WITH RUSSIA AND KAVANAUGH IS A PROVEN RAPIST!!!!!!!11"

He's a reliable voter for the Democrats.. they somehow keep feeding him such extreme bullshit and he's there eating it up like it's an imported chocolate souffle.

Grab a spoon retard... have another helping:

https://media0.giphy.com/media/d6KXqyzam7mH3kZvHF/giphy.gif

[Methais]

He's a reliable voter for the Democrats.. they somehow keep feeding him such extreme bullshit and he's there eating it up like it's an imported chocolate souffle.

Grab a spoon retard... have another helping:

https://media0.giphy.com/media/d6KXqyzam7mH3kZvHF/giphy.gif

Democrats: "My first order as president will be to execute every American citizen."

Back: OMG YES JUST TELL ME WHERE TO VOTE!!!!!!!!!!!

Democrats: "That kill list includes you and your entire family."

Back: THAT'S OK BECAUSE I HATE TRUMP SOOOOOOOOOOOOOO MUCH!!!!

[Tgo01]

No, your point is somehow trying to tie in alleged drug use with incompetency and corruption.

My very obvious point is how does someone go from being kicked out of the military because he tested positive for cocaine (this actually happened so fuck off with your "no evidence" bullshit) to landing a 50,000 dollar a month job in a foreign country in a field he has exactly zero experience in?

Can you name just one person in the history of the world who wasn't connected to a powerful person in someway in which they climbed the corporate ladder in such a fashion? That is they went from being kicked out of the military for being a coke fiend to making 50,000 dollars a month?

Of course not, because the real world doesn't work like that.

At the very least a normal person would say this all sounds suspicious.

But when it happens to the son of a Democrat vice president the left just says "Sounds normal to me!"

[Methais]

My very obvious point is how does someone go from being kicked out of the military because he tested positive for cocaine (this actually happened so fuck off with your "no evidence" bullshit) to landing a 50,000 dollar a month job in a foreign country in a field he has exactly zero experience in?

Can you name just one person in the history of the world who wasn't connected to a powerful person in someway in which they climbed the corporate ladder in such a fashion? That is they went from being kicked out of the military for being a coke fiend to making 50,000 dollars a month?

Of course not, because the real world doesn't work like that.

At the very least a normal person would say this all sounds suspicious.

But when it happens to the son of a Democrat vice president the left just says "Sounds normal to me!"

https://i.imgur.com/tTy1Ifh.png

[ClydeR]

Last week every major news outlet reported that Rick Perry was resigning next month. Most people assumed that the reason he was resigning was because of his trips to Ukraine that might have been related to Trump's request for Ukraine to investigate Biden. But today Perry said he isn't resigning after all!

Also -- and this is going to get him in trouble with his boss -- Perry said that he asked Trump several times to call Ukraine. But he said he asked Trump to speak with the president of Ukraine about energy, not about investigating Joe Biden.

And then there is this, which some people call the "blame Perry" defense!..


On Friday, the president claimed for the first time that he also hadn’t wanted to have the fateful July 25 call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky at all, but did so at the request of Energy Secretary Rick Perry. Trump made the claim despite the fact that the memo his own White House released about the call contained no reference to Perry and only a passing reference — by Zelensky — to potential trade with the U.S. energy sector.

More... (http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/10/trumps-bizarre-attempt-to-blame-rick-perry-for-ukraine-call.html)


How long do you think Perry will last?

[Seran]

Can you name just one person in the history of the world who wasn't connected to a powerful person in someway in which they climbed the corporate ladder in such a fashion? That is they went from being kicked out of the military for being a coke fiend to making 50,000 dollars a month?

Wait, so it's suspicious that a lawyer whose resume includes being an executive in the bank industry and was appointed to the board of directors of Amtrak by George W Bush is somehow under-qualified to serve on the board of directors for a Ukrainian company?

George W Bush only held a business degree and was governor for 4 years before becoming president. As he also had a cocaine incident, is he too under suspicion for luring Trump into commiting a campaign finance violation?

[Tgo01]

Wait, so it's suspicious that a lawyer whose resume includes being an executive in the bank industry and was appointed to the board of directors of Amtrak by George W Bush is somehow under-qualified to serve on the board of directors for a Ukrainian company?

Wait, so it's NOT suspicious that someone goes from lobbying to getting kicked out of the Navy for doing cocaine to landing a cushy 50k a month job in a company in which he has no experience in? I mean I guess that sounds legit.


George W Bush only held a business degree and was governor for 4 years before becoming president. As he also had a cocaine incident, is he too under suspicion for luring Trump into commiting a campaign finance violation?

You do understand the difference between running for public office and winning an election and getting a job at a company right?

[Seran]

You're splitting hairs in order to make Hunter Biden look as bad as possible as if that somehow changes the circumstances of Trump's alleged crimes.

[Tgo01]

You're splitting hairs in order to make Hunter Biden look as bad as possible as if that somehow changes the circumstances of Trump's alleged crimes.

Trump's alleged "crimes" is asking Ukraine to investigate corruption which just so happened to involve the Bidens. If there is no corruption then Joe and Hunter Biden should welcome an investigation to clear their names, don't you think?

[~Rocktar~]

Trump's alleged "crimes" is asking Ukraine to investigate corruption which just so happened to involve the Bidens. If there is no corruption then Joe and Hunter Biden should welcome an investigation to clear their names, don't you think?

To paraphrase 'If they have nothing to hide then they should be happy to cooperate with an investigation. Only guilty people hide from the government.'

[Seran]

Trump's alleged "crimes" is asking Ukraine to investigate corruption which just so happened to involve the Bidens. If there is no corruption then Joe and Hunter Biden should welcome an investigation to clear their names, don't you think?

For withholding aid until corruption investigation was agreed to and specifically for not separating the campaign to reelect from his executive position to enforce treaties, foreign relationships. The actions or misactions, however factual of a privately held energy company have nothing to do with military aid.

[Tgo01]

For withholding aid until corruption investigation was agreed to and specifically for not separating the campaign to reelect from his executive position to enforce treaties, foreign relationships.

You are going by the shit Adam Schiff literally made up instead of just reading the transcript. Why do you enjoy being lied to and misled by your elected officials?

[Gelston]

You are going by the shit Adam Schiff literally made up instead of just reading the transcript. Why do you enjoy being lied to and misled by your elected officials?

He wasn't lying, he said it was a "parody". Because he knew some people are too stupid to understand what that means and that they'd take everything he said as being 100% true.

[Tgo01]

He wasn't lying, he said it was a "parody". Because he knew some people are too stupid to understand what that means and that they'd take everything he said as being 100% true.

Saying it was a parody was a lame excuse for his lies.

I would rather take Bill Clinton's "it depends on what your definition of is is" over that.

[Gelston]

Saying it was a parody was a lame excuse for his lies.

I would rather take Bill Clinton's "it depends on what your definition of is is" over that.

He probably made sure to say that because he knew he'd get the shit sued out of him otherwise. I still think there is a case. He knew what he was doing.

[Seran]

You are going by the shit Adam Schiff literally made up instead of just reading the transcript. Why do you enjoy being lied to and misled by your elected officials?

To call it a transcript is misleading, because it's not. That's a summary of the conversation which is why the second whistleblower came forward

[Tgo01]

To call it a transcript is misleading, because it's not. That's a summary of the conversation which is why the second whistleblower came forward

Oh okay. We are going by conspiracy theories now.

Whistleblower: Trump demanded a quid pro quo!
Democrats: Release the transcript, you crook!
Trump releases transcript showing aid wasn't even mentioned.
Democrats: Doesn't matter!
John Brennan: If there are anymore whistleblowers out there...PLEASE come forward!
Second whistleblower: It's true, there was a quid pro quo! The transcript is a lie!

Weird how that works.

[Seran]

Yes, everything about that being a transcript is a lie. Thanks for citing an actual timeline for once.

[Tgo01]

Yes, everything about that being a transcript is a lie. Thanks for citing an actual timeline for once.

Glad to see you admit you are the most easily misled useful idiot on the PC.

[Parkbandit]

Glad to see you admit you are the most easily misled useful idiot on the PC.

Reported.

Please respect your champion and issue a formal apology.

[Tgo01]

Reported.

Please respect your champion and issue a formal apology.

My bad, I always forget the Back factor.

[Seran]

Glad to see you admit you are the most easily misled useful idiot on the PC.

I'll settle for useless idiot.

[Gelston]

I'll settle for useless idiot.

You are calling yourself a useless idiot?

[Wrathbringer]

For withholding aid until corruption investigation was agreed to and specifically for not separating the campaign to reelect from his executive position to enforce treaties, foreign relationships. The actions or misactions, however factual of a privately held energy company have nothing to do with military aid.

You're retarded.

[Parkbandit]

I'll settle for useless idiot.

I agree.

See tgo01, there IS hope for Seran!

[Methais]

Reported.

Please respect your champion and issue a formal apology.

When Dimebag Darrell was in his teens, he was wrecking everyone at guitar competitions so badly that they made him a judge so other people would have a chance.

From wiki:
At age 14, Abbott entered a guitar contest at the Agora Ballroom in Dallas, in which Dean Zelinsky, founder of Dean Guitars, was one of the judges.[12] Abbott's mother accompanied him to the club because he was not old enough to enter on his own.[13] He won the competition; Zelinsky recalled that "[Abbott] blew everyone away."[12] Abbott won many other guitar contests in the area, and was eventually asked not to compete and instead judge the competitions so others could win.


Back is basically the PC retard version of this. At this point he's transcended retard champion status and has become a retard elder god.

[Seran]

You're retarded.

I believe that's the Fox News message for true Patriots. "Deny, obfuscate, and protect the God-King at all cost."

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

I believe that's the Fox News message for true Patriots. "Deny, obfuscate, and protect the God-King at all cost."


You don't even try to understand why people support Trump, and thus, you never will. All you can do is rage about it.

[Methais]

I believe that's the Fox News message for true Patriots. "Deny, obfuscate, and protect the God-King at all cost."

Other than BECUZ THEY'RE NOT TRUMP!!!!!!," fueled butthurt, why should anyone vote for any of the democrats currently running in 2020?

Why should anyone have voted for Hillary in 2016?

[RichardCranium]

Other than BECUZ THEY'RE NOT TRUMP!!!!!!," fueled butthurt, why should anyone vote for any of the democrats currently running in 2020?

I think you know why I'm voting for Tulsi Gabbard.

[Methais]

I think you know why I'm voting for Tulsi Gabbard.

I forgot about her, so I feel it's only fair to add BECAUSE SHE HAS A NICE VAGINA to the "other than" list.

EDIT: Unless she offers to let you give it a pounding, in which case that's a perfectly acceptable reason as long as she delivers.

[Tgo01]

Biden says Trump should be impeached. I'm sure all of the Democrats will be outraged that a presidential candidate is trying to interfere with our elections in such a way!!!

I'm also sure Democrats will demand that any Democrat in the Senate running for president should also recuse themselves and not participate in any possible impeachment trial and won't vote on it.

Right?

...right?

[Alfster]

That logically makes no sense

[Tgo01]

That logically makes no sense

I thought Democrats were against election interference? Or is it they are only against foreign election interference when it supposedly benefits a Republican?

[Alfster]

I really don't know what they care about. Foreign interference is generally where the issue lies.

Impeachment inquiry goes far beyond that tho. Abusing national security systems to hide "bad" calls, having a private citizens acting on behalf of the government, pushing foreign countries to spend money at businesses he owns, not complying with oversight.

You know. As Lindsey Graham put it..."The day Richard Nixon failed to answer that subpoena is the day he was subject to impeachment because he took the power from Congress over the impeachment process away from Congress, and he became the judge and jury"

[Gelston]

I really don't know what they care about. Foreign interference is generally where the issue lies.

Impeachment inquiry goes far beyond that tho. Abusing national security systems to hide "bad" calls, having a private citizens acting on behalf of the government, pushing foreign countries to spend money at businesses he owns, not complying with oversight.

You know. As Lindsey Graham put it..."The day Richard Nixon failed to answer that subpoena is the day he was subject to impeachment because he took the power from Congress over the impeachment process away from Congress, and he became the judge and jury"

The difference is that the Impeachment process against Nixon had an actual vote in the Judicial committee. This is just some shit Nancy Pelosi started with no vote. That is why the White House is refusing to acknowledge the legitimacy of it. They have said if they want to subpoena stuff, make it official.

[Alfster]

That's a weak argument. They have the power for oversight, with or without impeachment

[Gelston]

That's a weak argument. They have the power for oversight, with or without impeachment

Doesn't matter if you think it is or not. It sets an ultimatum.

[Tgo01]

That's a weak argument. They have the power for oversight, with or without impeachment

Oversight doesn't mean they get to do whatever they want. If they want to hold formal impeachment inquiries and expect the White House to fully cooperate then hold a vote on it and get everyone on record so the voters know where their representatives stand on the issue.

Also with a formal impeachment inquiry the minority party would be able to argue for some power in the proceedings, namely they should have subpoena powers. Right now Democrats are the only ones who can subpoena people and of course they aren't going to subpoena anyone the Republicans would want to hear from.

If you're okay with the Democrats running roughshod over the voters and fellow congresspeople in the House you might want to consider that maybe you're not the good guy here.

[~Rocktar~]

Oversight doesn't mean they get to do whatever they want. If they want to hold formal impeachment inquiries and expect the White House to fully cooperate then hold a vote on it and get everyone on record so the voters know where their representatives stand on the issue.

Also with a formal impeachment inquiry the minority party would be able to argue for some power in the proceedings, namely they should have subpoena powers. Right now Democrats are the only ones who can subpoena people and of course they aren't going to subpoena anyone the Republicans would want to hear from.

If you're okay with the Democrats running roughshod over the voters and fellow congresspeople in the House you might want to consider that maybe you're not the good guy here.

This ^^

So much this, if those cowards want to have a vote and make it official, then let's get on it with it. Until then, it's a hoax/political stunt and is only hurting the Democrats in the end. After all, if the party is such a sore loser and wants to shit on about half the country then you can bet that a lot of the middle ground peeps will not be happy when the real campaign advertisements come out showing just how scummy this whole process has been.

[Alfster]

Doesn't matter if you think it is or not. It sets an ultimatum.

It's an odd hill to take a stand on, but yes. Make it official at this point. They have the votes.

I haven't paid as much attention to this over the last week or so because life's busy. Is the reason they haven't made it official because they're protecting Biden from cross examination? Investigate the whole thing in my opinion.

[Tgo01]

It's an odd hill to take a stand on, but yes. Make it official at this point. They have the votes.

I haven't paid as much attention to this over the last week or so because life's busy. Is the reason they haven't made it official because they're protecting Biden from cross examination? Investigate the whole thing in my opinion.

They haven't taken a vote because they are shielding moderate Democrats who won in red districts and they don't want to allow the Republican minority to have any power in this.

Pelosi is waiting for impeachment to become more popular with the American people because she doesn't really believe Trump did anything wrong, she's just using this as a tool to remain in power because after being in power for decades that's all she cares about anymore.

[Alfster]

Oversight doesn't mean they get to do whatever they want. If they want to hold formal impeachment inquiries and expect the White House to fully cooperate then hold a vote on it and get everyone on record so the voters know where their representatives stand on the issue.

Also with a formal impeachment inquiry the minority party would be able to argue for some power in the proceedings, namely they should have subpoena powers. Right now Democrats are the only ones who can subpoena people and of course they aren't going to subpoena anyone the Republicans would want to hear from.

If you're okay with the Democrats running roughshod over the voters and fellow congresspeople in the House you might want to consider that maybe you're not the good guy here.

With the exception of your third paragraph I actually agree with you.

In response to your third paragraph, this whole process needs to be transparent. This whole thing wouldn't even be happening had they not intercepted the whistleblower complaint. Us normal people wouldn't have even known it happened. But the cats out of the bag and it simply needs to be public. Public hearings don't bode well for Trump, hopefully he gets to take the stand and defend his points. I mean Hillary spent 11 hours on Benghazi.

[Alfster]

They haven't taken a vote because they are shielding moderate Democrats who won in red districts and they don't want to allow the Republican minority to have any power in this.

Pelosi is waiting for impeachment to become more popular with the American people because she doesn't really believe Trump did anything wrong, she's just using this as a tool to remain in power because after being in power for decades that's all she cares about anymore.

I mean. More people support impeachment country wide than don't.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/fox-news-poll-record-support-for-trump-impeachment

[Tgo01]

With the exception of your third paragraph I actually agree with you.

In response to your third paragraph, this whole process needs to be transparent. This whole thing wouldn't even be happening had they not intercepted the whistleblower complaint. Us normal people wouldn't have even known it happened. But the cats out of the bag and it simply needs to be public. Public hearings don't bode well for Trump, hopefully he gets to take the stand and defend his points. I mean Hillary spent 11 hours on Benghazi.

Oh please, like the deranged Democrats in the House weren't just itching for a reason to launch a "formal" impeachment inquiry. They would have done this no matter what happened to the "whistleblower" complaint. Schiff already knew what was in the whistleblower's complaint before the complaint was made. Almost as if they were working together for exactly this reason.

[Alfster]

So you don't agree it needs to be transparent?

[Tgo01]

I mean. More people support impeachment country wide than don't.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/fox-news-poll-record-support-for-trump-impeachment

A lot of those people are the same deranged Democrat voters who voted in the deranged Democrats who are currently launching this bogus impeachment inquiry.

Also 51% in a poll is hardly a mandate. If that were like 70% that would be a different story.

Lastly a lot of that could be chalked up to the fact that the Democrats launched the bogus impeachment inquiry to begin with.

It's a sort of self fulfilling prophecy:
No impeachment inquiry? Most Americans are against impeachment (shit even more Democrats were against it at that point.)
Fake impeachment inquiry? Suddenly more Americans are for impeachment.

Are those people really in favor of an impeachment, or is it just more Democrats jumping on the bandwagon because they have received their marching orders from the Democrats in the House?

Also I bet the longer this bullshit drags on with no votes of any kind will result in fewer people being in favor of impeachment rather than more.

[Tgo01]

So you don't agree it needs to be transparent?

I'm the one who said Pelosi should hold an official vote in the House and allow Republicans to subpoena too, how am I suddenly not about transparency?

Trump was the one who released the classified transcript almost immediately after Democrats demanded it be released only for this to give them all the more reason to demand more and more bullshit they don't need to see, like transcripts with other foreign leaders.

You can hate Trump all you want for winning an election, but Trump has done the right things so far whereas the Democrats have not. They demanded Trump release the transcript expecting full well that he wouldn't and using that as a rationale to scream "cover up!" But he released the transcript in like what 48 hours? So the narrative instantly shifted to "well the transcript doesn't matter anyways!" Then Schiff literally lied about what Trump said in the transcript to further the Democrats' narrative, then they started demanded more and more shit not because they have suspicion of a crime, but because they are hoping to uncover a crime or be able to accuse Trump of a coverup if he doesn't comply with their endless draconian demands.

If there is so much damning evidence of a crime in the transcript then why do Democrats need to lie about it AND demand more and more evidence? Just impeach Trump over the Ukrainian call. But it's almost as if the Democrats have nothing but they are hoping to find something.

[Gelston]

I'm the one who said Pelosi should hold an official vote in the House and allow Republicans to subpoena too, how am I suddenly not about transparency?

Trump was the one who released the classified transcript almost immediately after Democrats demanded it be released only for this to give them all the more reason to demand more and more bullshit they don't need to see, like transcripts with other foreign leaders.

You can hate Trump all you want for winning an election, but Trump has done the right things so far whereas the Democrats have not. They demanded Trump release the transcript expecting full well that he wouldn't and using that as a rationale to scream "cover up!" But he released the transcript in like what 48 hours? So the narrative instantly shifted to "well the transcript doesn't matter anyways!" Then Schiff literally lied about what Trump said in the transcript to further the Democrats' narrative, then they started demanded more and more shit not because they have suspicion of a crime, but because they are hoping to uncover a crime or be able to accuse Trump of a coverup if he doesn't comply with their endless draconian demands.

Honestly, if the House wants to play that little fuck fuck game, I think the Senate Judiciary should do the same thing, but subpoena the people House Dems won't.

[Seran]

I'm the one who said Pelosi should hold an official vote in the House and allow Republicans to subpoena too, how am I suddenly not about transparency?

Trump was the one who released the classified transcript almost immediately after Democrats demanded it be released only for this to give them all the more reason to demand more and more bullshit they don't need to see, like transcripts with other foreign leaders.

You can hate Trump all you want for winning an election, but Trump has done the right things so far whereas the Democrats have not. They demanded Trump release the transcript expecting full well that he wouldn't and using that as a rationale to scream "cover up!" But he released the transcript in like what 48 hours? So the narrative instantly shifted to "well the transcript doesn't matter anyways!" Then Schiff literally lied about what Trump said in the transcript to further the Democrats' narrative, then they started demanded more and more shit not because they have suspicion of a crime, but because they are hoping to uncover a crime or be able to accuse Trump of a coverup if he doesn't comply with their endless draconian demands.

If there is so much damning evidence of a crime in the transcript then why do Democrats need to lie about it AND demand more and more evidence? Just impeach Trump over the Ukrainian call. But it's almost as if the Democrats have nothing but they are hoping to find something.

It's not a transcript, it's a summary. A transcript would have been a verbatim written accounting of the phone call, this document clearly states it's not verbatim.

Two whistleblowers have information about what was actually said and left out. Between the lies Trump has told, the obstruction of Congress's constitutional oversight authority and his proven obstruction, he's following lockstep in Nixon's footsteps.

[Tgo01]

It's not a transcript, it's a summary. A transcript would have been a verbatim written accounting of the phone call, this document clearly states it's not verbatim.

Yes yes, we are all well aware of your conspiracy theory.


Two whistleblowers have information about what was actually said and left out.

Don't you mean one whistleblower has second and third hand information about what was said and the second whistleblower was one of the source's for the first whistleblower?

[Tgo01]

I mean. More people support impeachment country wide than don't.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/fox-news-poll-record-support-for-trump-impeachment

Apparently this poll was conducted with 48% Democrats (40% of which were "solid" Democrats), 40% Republicans (33% of which were "solid" Republicans), and only 12% Independent. Not exactly representative of the overall political makeup of the country as a whole.

The poll also has a margin of error of 5% among Republicans, 7% among moderates, and 8.5% among Independents. This is like almost like someone running a parody of a poll.

[~Rocktar~]

Apparently this poll was conducted with 48% Democrats (40% of which were "solid" Democrats), 40% Republicans (33% of which were "solid" Republicans), and only 12% Independent. Not exactly representative of the overall political makeup of the country as a whole.

The poll also has a margin of error of 5% among Republicans, 7% among moderates, and 8.5% among Independents. This is like almost like someone running a parody of a poll.

I think that 9yr old that did the plastic straw research had better data than this poll likely does.

[Some Rogue]

Apparently this poll was conducted with 48% Democrats (40% of which were "solid" Democrats), 40% Republicans (33% of which were "solid" Republicans), and only 12% Independent. Not exactly representative of the overall political makeup of the country as a whole.

The poll also has a margin of error of 5% among Republicans, 7% among moderates, and 8.5% among Independents. This is like almost like someone running a parody of a poll.


Kinda like Fox News is a parody of a news organization.

[Candor]

Kinda like Fox News is a parody of a news organization.

Fox News has been in the top of the ratings for over three years. CNN viewership has been taking a nosedive.

[Some Rogue]

Fox News has been in the top of the ratings for over three years. CNN viewership has been taking a nosedive.

And people watch Real Housewives, Dancing with the Stars, The Bachelor and bullshit like that. Your point?

[Seran]

Kinda like Fox News is a parody of a news organization.

State sponsored propaganda machine more like it.

[Tgo01]

State sponsored propaganda machine more like it.

No that would be NPR.

[gemstonefella]

I'm the one who said Pelosi should hold an official vote in the House and allow Republicans to subpoena too, how am I suddenly not about transparency?

Trump was the one who released the classified transcript almost immediately after Democrats demanded it be released only for this to give them all the more reason to demand more and more bullshit they don't need to see, like transcripts with other foreign leaders.

You can hate Trump all you want for winning an election, but Trump has done the right things so far whereas the Democrats have not. They demanded Trump release the transcript expecting full well that he wouldn't and using that as a rationale to scream "cover up!" But he released the transcript in like what 48 hours? So the narrative instantly shifted to "well the transcript doesn't matter anyways!" Then Schiff literally lied about what Trump said in the transcript to further the Democrats' narrative, then they started demanded more and more shit not because they have suspicion of a crime, but because they are hoping to uncover a crime or be able to accuse Trump of a coverup if he doesn't comply with their endless draconian demands.

If there is so much damning evidence of a crime in the transcript then why do Democrats need to lie about it AND demand more and more evidence? Just impeach Trump over the Ukrainian call. But it's almost as if the Democrats have nothing but they are hoping to find something.


Oh the irony: From February 2015

Democratic lawmakers are harshly criticizing House Republicans for altering committee rules governing how chairmen can subpoena witnesses and documents.

In a letter shared with POLITICO, the Democrats slams the GOP conference for changing rules on a number of House committees to make it easier for Republicans to subpoena witnesses without consultation or approval from minority lawmakers - an effort that came as Republicans are preparing aggressive oversight efforts for President Barack Obama’s final two years in office.

“This year House Republicans are changing the rules to give some chairmen unfettered authority to issue subpoenas unilaterally, adopting an abusive model embraced only by Senator Joe McCarthy, former Rep. Dan Burton, and Rep. Darrell Issa,” the lawmakers wrote. “To their credit, some well-functioning committees, such as the Committees on Appropriations, Armed Services, Intelligence, and Veterans Affairs, did not expand subpoena power for their chairmen.”

At the time, Republican defended the rule change as necessary to effectively investigate the Obama administration.

“The Obama administration has employed unprecedented delay tactics and in many cases an outright refusal to comply with legitimate committee oversight requests, which is why committees sought the deposition authority and are using the existing rules to give committee chairs greater latitude in issuing subpoenas,” said Doug Andres, then a spokesman for the House Rules Committee.

[Tgo01]

Oh the irony: From February 2015

Democratic lawmakers are harshly criticizing House Republicans for altering committee rules governing how chairmen can subpoena witnesses and documents.

In a letter shared with POLITICO, the Democrats slams the GOP conference for changing rules on a number of House committees to make it easier for Republicans to subpoena witnesses without consultation or approval from minority lawmakers - an effort that came as Republicans are preparing aggressive oversight efforts for President Barack Obama’s final two years in office.

“This year House Republicans are changing the rules to give some chairmen unfettered authority to issue subpoenas unilaterally, adopting an abusive model embraced only by Senator Joe McCarthy, former Rep. Dan Burton, and Rep. Darrell Issa,” the lawmakers wrote. “To their credit, some well-functioning committees, such as the Committees on Appropriations, Armed Services, Intelligence, and Veterans Affairs, did not expand subpoena power for their chairmen.”

At the time, Republican defended the rule change as necessary to effectively investigate the Obama administration.

“The Obama administration has employed unprecedented delay tactics and in many cases an outright refusal to comply with legitimate committee oversight requests, which is why committees sought the deposition authority and are using the existing rules to give committee chairs greater latitude in issuing subpoenas,” said Doug Andres, then a spokesman for the House Rules Committee.

And that has nothing to do with what I or Republicans in the House are talking about. What's being talked about is if Democrats held an official impeachment inquiry then it would give Republicans a chance to issue subpoenas since the minority party is typically allowed to subpoena witnesses too during an official impeachment inquiry.

This isn't an accident on Pelosi's part, it's a calculated move to both pay lip service to the radicals in her party while also shielding the more moderates who won seats in red districts.

[Furryrat]

Oh the irony: From February 2015

Democratic lawmakers are harshly criticizing House Republicans for altering committee rules governing how chairmen can subpoena witnesses and documents.

In a letter shared with POLITICO, the Democrats slams the GOP conference for changing rules on a number of House committees to make it easier for Republicans to subpoena witnesses without consultation or approval from minority lawmakers - an effort that came as Republicans are preparing aggressive oversight efforts for President Barack Obama’s final two years in office.

“This year House Republicans are changing the rules to give some chairmen unfettered authority to issue subpoenas unilaterally, adopting an abusive model embraced only by Senator Joe McCarthy, former Rep. Dan Burton, and Rep. Darrell Issa,” the lawmakers wrote. “To their credit, some well-functioning committees, such as the Committees on Appropriations, Armed Services, Intelligence, and Veterans Affairs, did not expand subpoena power for their chairmen.”

At the time, Republican defended the rule change as necessary to effectively investigate the Obama administration.

“The Obama administration has employed unprecedented delay tactics and in many cases an outright refusal to comply with legitimate committee oversight requests, which is why committees sought the deposition authority and are using the existing rules to give committee chairs greater latitude in issuing subpoenas,” said Doug Andres, then a spokesman for the House Rules Committee.

It's only ironic in that the fog of politics obscures reason in 2 and 4 year cycles.

[gemstonefella]

I understand why she’s doing it and don’t disagree with you at all but the fact remains that the GOP would have been able to subpoena people if they hadn’t given that power over unilaterally to the chairmen of committees in 2015.

Was as dumb as Harry Reid’s nuclear option.


I assume Trumps declaration of a national emergency on the southern border will lead to more presidential abuse of power down the road as well.

I may be mistaken but I believe there was never a full house vote on Nixon either, until after he resigned. I’m not sure about Clinton. The constitution really doesn’t spell out the path that impeachment proceedings should take.


Both sides suck dick.

#kasich2020

[Tgo01]

I understand why she’s doing it and don’t disagree with you at all but the fact remains that the GOP would have been able to subpoena people if they hadn’t given that power over unilaterally to the chairmen of committees in 2015.

That's not what the rule change was about. Before the minority party was at least consulted before subpoenas were sent out, but ultimately the party in charge was the one who sent out subpoenas.

But in an official impeachment inquiry both parties typically have subpoena powers because an impeachment is a bit more important than the typical mundane shit the House investigates.

[gemstonefella]

Curious as to where the official rules of an impeachment inquiry can be found? I’d like to read them.

Typically a Supreme Court nominee gets a confirmation hearing. I’m sure you also spoke out about McConnell blocking the hearing for Garland?

[Tgo01]

Curious as to where the official rules of an impeachment inquiry can be found? I’d like to read them.

It's not an official rules, it's just something that has typically been done in impeachment hearings. Pelosi could probably just deny Republicans the right to subpoena in an official impeachment inquiry as well, but that would be yet another thing she would have to defend.

At least McConnell defended his actions of not giving Garland a hearing. You don't have to like his excuse, but he gave one. He didn't just use some lame tactic like Pelosi is doing.

[gemstonefella]

Right.

The presidents team would then he able to investigate and subpoena witnesses in the senate trial....if it gets to there. It’s how the process works.

[gemstonefella]

It's not an official rules, it's just something that has typically been done in impeachment hearings. Pelosi could probably just deny Republicans the right to subpoena in an official impeachment inquiry as well, but that would be yet another thing she would have to defend.

At least McConnell defended his actions of not giving Garland a hearing. You don't have to like his excuse, but he gave one. He didn't just use some lame tactic like Pelosi is doing.

I’m going to say McConnell “not using a lame tactic “ is defined by how partisan a person is. Coming from a true non-partisan voter, it was extremely lame.

[gemstonefella]

If you want to use McConnell’s excuse, well then, the 2018 election showed that the people wanted Democrats in the house, therefore whatever they do with impeachment is mandated by the public.

[Tgo01]

If you want to use McConnell’s excuse, well then, the 2018 election showed that the people wanted Democrats in the house, therefore whatever they do with impeachment is mandated by the public.

That wasn't McConnell's excuse.

[gemstonefella]

He said the American people should have a voice in the process. Isn't that what happened in the 2018 election? America had a voice in the election? They voted Democrat. Just like I told my Democrat friends in 2016...elections have consequences.

[gemstonefella]

"The next justice could fundamentally alter the direction of the Supreme Court and have a profound impact on our country, so of course the American people should have a say in the court's direction," he said.

[Tgo01]

He said the American people should have a voice in the process. Isn't that what happened in the 2018 election? America had a voice in the election? They voted Democrat. Just like I told my Democrat friends in 2016...elections have consequences.

He said since it was Obama's last year in office (since he couldn't run again) and with it being an election year that the American people should have a voice. Presumably he would have given Hillary's pick a hearing had she won. Yes he was clearly hedging his bets in the (at the time) off chance of Trump winning, but that was his reasoning. Again you don't have to like it but at least he didn't just make up something like they were going through with an impeachment inquiry even though they aren't really going through with an impeachment inquiry.

[gemstonefella]

But the house is going through with an impeachment inquiry. You don’t have to like how they are doing it, but they’re not breaking any laws or even their own house rules to do it.

I wouldn’t presume anything with McConnell either. I really love how he was alluding to the “Biden Rule”, back then. Like that buffoon has ever had a solid thought in his head.

It’s too bad he wasn’t Trump’s VP. 2 of the biggest groping dumbasses in the history of American politics on one ticket!

[RichardCranium]

But the house is going through with an impeachment inquiry. You don’t have to like how they are doing it, but they’re not breaking any laws or even their own house rules to do it.

I wouldn’t presume anything with McConnell either. I really love how he was alluding to the “Biden Rule”, back then. Like that buffoon has ever had a solid thought in his head.

It’s too bad he wasn’t Trump’s VP. 2 of the biggest groping dumbasses in the history of American politics on one ticket!

He's also on record as saying if RBG passed that of course they would choose in 2020. He's a partisan hack, same as the rest.

[Tgo01]

But the house is going through with an impeachment inquiry.

Just because Pelosi says they are doesn't mean they are. Voters have a right to know how their representatives stand on this issue so Pelosi should put it up for a vote.

[gemstonefella]

He's also on record as saying if RBG passed that of course they would choose in 2020. He's a partisan hack, same as the rest.

That’s a true story.

[gemstonefella]

Just because Pelosi says they are doesn't mean they are. Voters have a right to know how their representatives stand on this issue so Pelosi should put it up for a vote.

Voters overwhelmingly put the Democrats in charge of the house in 2018, letting them make the rules. There’s no rule saying they have to vote now.

The voters will again have a say next election. If they were unhappy with how the Dems conducted the proceedings, they will vote them out.

I think it’s fairly obvious they are conducting impeachment proceedings.

[gemstonefella]

Hell, I called my rep and asked. Got an answer also. Of course living in Western Washington State it was pretty much a dumb question.

[Tgo01]

Voters overwhelmingly put the Democrats in charge of the house in 2018, letting them make the rules. There’s no rule saying they have to vote now.

The voters will again have a say next election. If they were unhappy with how the Dems conducted the proceedings, they will vote them out.

I think it’s fairly obvious they are conducting impeachment proceedings.

That's not how this works. This is like saying Nancy Pelosi can just decide that Trump is impeached and will now hand it over to the Senate.

Put it up for a vote in the House. This is actually a serious process and not just some dumb SCOTUS position being delayed a few months.

[gemstonefella]

Anyway I’m headed to bed. Thanks for the back and forth without any name calling or ad hominem attacks. It’s refreshing in this day and age. Ive watched the watergate hearings, Iranian hostage situation, iran-contra, Clinton impeachment proceedings, 9/11 and the move to two wars, Benghazi, and now the trump impeachment move and always been fascinated with the politics. Having a California state senator in the family while growing up didn’t hurt with the inquisitiveness either.

Cheers!

[gemstonefella]

A SCOTUS appointment is one of the most important things in American politics. A lifetime appointment beholden to no voting bloc? Yuge.

Of course there will have to be a vote. It just doesn’t have to be now. The law is on the side of the Dems this time.

[Tgo01]

A SCOTUS appointment is one of the most important things in American politics. A lifetime appointment beholden to no voting bloc? Yuge.

Of course there will have to be a vote. It just doesn’t have to be now. The law is on the side of the Dems this time.

I think delaying a SCOTUS appointment for a few months is nowhere near as important as impeaching the president.

Also the comparison between McConnell's SCOTUS hearing and Pelosi's impeachment inquiry aren't even comparable. McConnell didn't just decide who the new SCOTUS judge would be, he delayed the hearing for a few months.

Pelosi on the other hand just unilaterally decided the House was launching an impeachment inquiry, even though the House voted on no such thing.

[Gelston]

He said the American people should have a voice in the process. Isn't that what happened in the 2018 election? America had a voice in the election? They voted Democrat. Just like I told my Democrat friends in 2016...elections have consequences.

The House has jack all to do with Suprene Court Justices.

[gemstonefella]

Agreed! I must not have been clear enough if that’s what you both got out of that. My apologies. I was saying that the dems lost the 2016 election, and the SCOTUS nomination along with it. The GOP lost the 2018 election, and the right to run the house as they saw fit.

[gemstonefella]

McConnell is unilaterally holding up hundreds of pieces of legislation in the senate, does this bother you? He puts virtually nothing forward until he knows the president is in on board. Does that bother you that the legislative branch is acting as a de facto part of the executive?

[Gelston]

Agreed! I must not have been clear enough if that’s what you both got out of that. My apologies. I was saying that the dems lost the 2016 election, and the SCOTUS nomination along with it. The GOP lost the 2018 election, and the right to run the house as they saw fit.

Ah, okay. Makes more sense. Which is why I think Senate Republicans need to do more. They can set up their own inquiry in the Senate Judiciary and subpoena all the people they want.

[Neveragain]

McConnell is unilaterally holding up hundreds of pieces of legislation in the senate, does this bother you? He puts virtually nothing forward until he knows the president is in on board. Does that bother you that the legislative branch is acting as a de facto part of the executive?

This is pretty much how Washington has always worked. Pretty much no legislation is put up for a vote until there has been enough votes "lobbied" to move it forward in the process. Other than campaigning, this is what lawmakers spend the majority of their time doing.

There has always been "100's" of pieces of legislation being held back, which is probably a good thing. Have you seen how retarded these people are?

P.S. I really suppose it depends on how you view the role of government, is it there to create law or prevent law?

[ClydeR]

Is this important?


Two foreign-born associates of President Donald Trump's personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, were among those indicted (https://www.politico.com/f/?id=0000016d-b604-d0d8-af6d-f77cd3e20000) on campaign finance charges made public on Thursday over alleged schemes to buy political influence on behalf of a Ukrainian government official and a Russian businessman.

The Giuliani associates had been working with the former New York mayor on a campaign to discredit and former Vice President Joe Biden.

More... (https://www.politico.com/news/2019/10/10/rudy-giuliani-ukraine-associates-indicted-043873)

[Seran]

All this ire about Pelosi not putting the impeachment inquiry to a full vote and giving Republican's a fair shake at subpeona power is so ridiculously hypocritical.

Trump and Giuliani have said blatantly that they, nor any member of the Executive branch will comply with the impeachment inquiry. Why should Pelosi then cooperate at all with Republican demands, so they have an opportunity to cherry pick witnesses that Trump alone will demand or to receive document's that Trump will magnanimously comply with?

McCarthy is demanding something he's not entitled to and until the executive recognizes Congress's constitutional authority, Pelosi is justified in telling him to go fuck off.

[Seran]

Is this important?

Only if you believe informants should be credible. It's pretty damning, particularly all of the campaign contributions and pay for play meetings setup with the President. Their credibility, such that ever existed is shot.

[Gelston]

All this ire about Pelosi not putting the impeachment inquiry to a full vote and giving Republican's a fair shake at subpeona power is so ridiculously hypocritical.

Trump and Giuliani have said blatantly that they, nor any member of the Executive branch will comply with the impeachment inquiry. Why should Pelosi then cooperate at all with Republican demands, so they have an opportunity to cherry pick witnesses that Trump alone will demand or to receive document's that Trump will magnanimously comply with?

McCarthy is demanding something he's not entitled to and until the executive recognizes Congress's constitutional authority, Pelosi is justified in telling him to go fuck off.

I mean, they either make it official and get cooperation, or don't make it official and get nothing of substance. Up to them.

[Seran]

I mean, they either make it official and get cooperation, or don't make it official and get nothing of substance. Up to them.

You're pretty deluded if you think Trump will comply with the inquiry if that happens. Hell, even Giuliani was up front in saying they "might" cooperate if it comes to a full vote.

[Gelston]

You're pretty deluded if you think Trump will comply with the inquiry if that happens. Hell, even Giuliani was up front in saying they "might" cooperate if it comes to a full vote.

You pretty deluded to think he wouldn't at that point. It would be an official inquiry at that point. Right now it is just Pelosi. Do you really not see the difference?

[Seran]

It's already an official inquiry. Just because it's not been put to a full vote doesn't mean Congress loses it's oversight authority. Trump doesn't mould reality.

[Gelston]

It's already an official inquiry. Just because it's not been put to a full vote doesn't mean Congress loses it's oversight authority. Trump doesn't mould reality.

No, it isn't an official inquiry. It is Dem Committee Chairmen subpoenaing people. An official inquiry would allow both sides to subpoena and requires a vote within the committee. A vote that would easily pass, as it would be on party lines. For some reason, they do not want to do this.

[Neveragain]

No, it isn't an official inquiry. It is Dem Committee Chairmen subpoenaing people. An official inquiry would allow both sides to subpoena and requires a vote within the committee. A vote that would easily pass, as it would be on party lines. For some reason, they do not want to do this.

Honestly, Pelosi just wants to turn this over to the senate. There's a whole lot more political capital in doing so for the Democrats.They get to say "Look, we tried to impeach but those evil Republicans stopped us." Their base will eat it up. There's far too much risk in going full blown impeachment and in this case....there's a pretty good chance some democrats will go down in the process.

[Methais]

Biden says Trump should be impeached. I'm sure all of the Democrats will be outraged that a presidential candidate is trying to interfere with our elections in such a way!!!

I'm also sure Democrats will demand that any Democrat in the Senate running for president should also recuse themselves and not participate in any possible impeachment trial and won't vote on it.

Right?

...right?


I really don't know what they care about. Foreign interference is generally where the issue lies.

Impeachment inquiry goes far beyond that tho. Abusing national security systems to hide "bad" calls, having a private citizens acting on behalf of the government, pushing foreign countries to spend money at businesses he owns, not complying with oversight.

You know. As Lindsey Graham put it..."The day Richard Nixon failed to answer that subpoena is the day he was subject to impeachment because he took the power from Congress over the impeachment process away from Congress, and he became the judge and jury"

https://i.imgflip.com/30dcww.jpg

[Methais]

Biden says Trump should be impeached. I'm sure all of the Democrats will be outraged that a presidential candidate is trying to interfere with our elections in such a way!!!

I'm also sure Democrats will demand that any Democrat in the Senate running for president should also recuse themselves and not participate in any possible impeachment trial and won't vote on it.

Right?

...right?


It's an odd hill to take a stand on, but yes. Make it official at this point. They have the votes.

I haven't paid as much attention to this over the last week or so because life's busy. Is the reason they haven't made it official because they're protecting Biden from cross examination? Investigate the whole thing in my opinion.

They don't want to make it official becauase none of them want to be on record as having voted for it, especially the ones who live in red states.

So instead they're putting on this show to appease the Backlashes of their party, which seems to be most of their party these days.

[Seran]

I'm sure the Democrats are every bit as eager to meet the pro forma demands of the Player's Corner since we're such a happily partison representation of the electorate.

[Gelston]

I'm sure the Democrats are every bit as eager to meet the pro forma demands of the Player's Corner since we're such a happily partison representation of the electorate.

Tell me why they don't just do the vote in committee and make in official? Hmm? Pelosi afraid to share subpoena power? Give me a reason.

[Seran]

A full vote of the House doesn't even guarantee subpeona power. I'm guessing that she knows if the partisan warrior's of the minority party start issuing subpeonas then they'll be the only ones answered. Trump will happily crow that he's answering the only legitimate inquiries, which will focus solely around Hunter Biden, Benghazi and Secretary of State Clinton.

[Gelston]

A full vote of the House doesn't even guarantee subpeona power. I'm guessing that she knows if the partisan warrior's of the minority party start issuing subpeonas then they'll be the only ones answered. Trump will happily crow that he's answering the only legitimate inquiries, which will focus solely around Hunter Biden, Benghazi and Secretary of State Clinton.

It is a committee vote to make it official, not the entire House. The House votes after the committee posts its findings. And no, all the subpoenas will be answered, if the inquiry is made official. The Supreme Court ruled on this vs Nixon. The only leg Trump is standing on right now is that this unofficial inquiry is Unconstitutional. Make it official, he no longer has that.

[Seran]

It is a committee vote to make it official, not the entire House. The House votes after the committee posts its findings. And no, all the subpoenas will be answered, if the inquiry is made official. The Supreme Court ruled on this vs Nixon. The only leg Trump is standing on right now is that this unofficial inquiry is Unconstitutional. Make it official, he no longer has that.

I look forward to being proved wrong if that's truly the case.

[Methais]

I mean. More people support impeachment country wide than don't.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/fox-news-poll-record-support-for-trump-impeachment

I support it too, and I'd say "yes" if I got polled on it, just to watch democrats get pwned even harder in 2020.

[Methais]

Kinda like Fox News is a parody of a news organization.

What do you think about the other networks though? Mainly...

NBC
ABC
CBS
CNN
MSNBC

Asking for a friend.

[Tgo01]

McConnell is unilaterally holding up hundreds of pieces of legislation in the senate, does this bother you? He puts virtually nothing forward until he knows the president is in on board. Does that bother you that the legislative branch is acting as a de facto part of the executive?

No, why would it bother me? It didn't bother me when Harry Reid was doing the same thing. The Senate chooses its own rules and I'm fine with that.

What I'm not fine with is the leader in EITHER house just deciding how the House/Senate is going to do something without a vote. Let me put it this way: If at some point in the past the House voted to allow the speaker to unilaterally launch an impeachment inquiry then I would have no problem with what Pelosi is doing. But since that has never happened then it's bullshit that Pelosi thinks she can do this without so much as a floor vote, and it should bother every American but too many people on the left and others suffering from TDS don't care because they want Trump gone even if it means their elected officials act as dictators along the way.

[Alfster]

The longer this goes on, the worse it is for Trump. Especially as it's clear it's far deeper than a single phone call. They're playing an odd game, as most middle ground people see his actions as more guilty, simply by not complying.

[Tgo01]

Especially as it's clear it's far deeper than a single phone call.

Such as?

[Alfster]

Campaign finance issues with the two Russians that were arrested yesterday.

Abusing national security systems.

Guiliani and two others acting on behalf of the government as private citizens.

Publicly asking for China's help.

Profiting off his position by having foreign dignitaries pay for rooms at his businesses they don't utilize.

It's not a criminal proceeding, so public opinion matters - and the support for his removal has grown rapidly. Their only defense is stonewalling and attacking the credibility of a whistleblower. Nothing as far as a defense of his alleged crimes.

[Methais]

...so public opinion matters - and the support for his removal has grown rapidly.

Grown rapidly among who specifically? A bunch of already chronically triggered leftists?

[Alfster]

All of the polls are pretty similar that I've seen. Roughly 50% support impeachment and remove. The trend is independents are the ones leaning towards it

[Methais]

All of the polls are pretty similar that I've seen. Roughly 50% support impeachment and remove. The trend is independents are the ones leaning towards it

Are these the same polls that said Hillary had a 6 billion percent chance to win the 2016 election?

[RichardCranium]

Are these the same polls that said Hillary had a 6 billion percent chance to win the 2016 election?

She won the popular vote.

[Parkbandit]

All of the polls are pretty similar that I've seen. Roughly 50% support impeachment and remove. The trend is independents are the ones leaning towards it

https://media.giphy.com/media/5bitoGmL7XMMHiaq0H/giphy.gif

You should realize by now that most "polls" are used to create the news, not to report on an actual trend.

[Methais]

She won the poopular vote.

Fixed.


You should realize by now that most "polls" are used to create the news, not to report on an actual trend.

This is correct.

[Alfster]

https://media.giphy.com/media/5bitoGmL7XMMHiaq0H/giphy.gif

You should realize by now that most "polls" are used to create the news, not to report on an actual trend.

Hah.

[Fortybox]

She won the popular vote.

She didn't get the votes where it counted. Sorry you're still mad...3 years later.

[Parkbandit]

She didn't get the votes where it counted. Sorry you're still mad...3 years later.

I doubt he's mad.

Like at all.

[RichardCranium]

I doubt he's mad.

Like at all.

REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!

Shows what your know.

[Methais]

REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!

Shows what your know.

LOOK HOW MAD YOU ARE!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[~Rocktar~]

So, about that FOX News poll, seems they weighted it 14% in favor of Democrats. Good luck Democraps, Trump 2020.

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2019/10/stunning-fox-news-plays-trick-on-viewers-oversamples-democrats-by-14-points-in-junk-impeachment-poll/

[Gelston]

Eh, all the polls are retarded anyways. There is always these MSNBC polls that get passed to a lot of gun groups I'm in (that have tens of thousands of people each) and we all go vote in them. Completely making it one-sided in a way they don't expect.

[~Rocktar~]

Eh, all the polls are retarded anyways. There is always these MSNBC polls that get passed to a lot of gun groups I'm in (that have tens of thousands of people each) and we all go vote in them. Completely making it one-sided in a way they don't expect.

Yes, most polls are crap. Also, I love when that kind of thing happens cause it just throws egg on the face of the mass media.

[Furryrat]

Yes, most polls are crap. Also, I love when that kind of thing happens cause it just throws egg on the face of the mass media.

It has always been my belief that most media 'polls' are simply tools to influence the common undecided voter who would prefer to vote for the 'winner'.