Pelosi officially announces impeachment inquiry [Archive] - Page 6

Solkern

11-07-2019, 04:02 AM

That's what Trump was accused of but all signs point to at worst he said he wanted Ukraine to openly declare they would fight corruption, exactly what the Obama administration did to Ukraine.

Pretty sure Obama didn’t want them to investigate a political opponent.
And I’m pretty sure Biden has already been cleared of any wrong doing.
QPQ isn’t the entire issue, you keep forgetting, that it’s against a political rival. That’s the main issue

Neveragain

11-07-2019, 04:22 AM

Pretty sure Obama didn’t want them to investigate a political opponent.
And I’m pretty sure Biden has already been cleared of any wrong doing.
QPQ isn’t the entire issue, you keep forgetting, that it’s against a political rival. That’s the main issue

Cleared by who?

Where do we apply for these mega jobs with a blank resume, a record of cocaine use and removal from the military?

Just asking for every poor and middle class American.

Pretty sure Obama didn’t want them to investigate a political opponent.

No he just used a phony dossier, paid for by the Clinton campaign, to secure a fisa warrant so they could spy on their political opponent. Then Hillary, being so wise, went on to call fellow democrats Russian assets and completely destroyed the Russian hoax that her team created.

We won't even get started on how 3 years ago the media killed an interview that exposed Epstein, Clinton and their kid diddling ways in the middle of Hillary running for president.

https://www.thewrap.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/Screen-Shot-2019-04-03-at-8.46.21-AM.png

Tgo01

11-07-2019, 04:24 AM

Pretty sure Obama didn’t want them to investigate a political opponent.

Again that's what Trump has been accused of yet the testimony so far at worst points in the direction he wanted them to fight corruption.

And I’m pretty sure Biden has already been cleared of any wrong doing.

Cleared by whom exactly? The Obama administration?

QPQ isn’t the entire issue, you keep forgetting, that it’s against a political rival. That’s the main issue

And so far we have a transcript that doesn't come close to proving Trump was withholding aid until Ukraine gave Trump something in return, much less that he demanded Ukraine investigate Joe Biden in order to receive the aid.

We have anonymous testimony from a supposed whistleblower who is so far left he's flirting with communism and this whistleblower has no first hand knowledge of the phone call in question.

We have someone who was on the call who is also partisan who said shit that is directly contradicted by another person who was on the phone call.

This is why I say people really should stop getting their "facts" from the partisan hack known as Adam Schiff because he has admitted to flat out lying about what Trump said on the phone call in question but he just downplayed it as a "parody."

Parkbandit

11-07-2019, 09:42 AM

Pretty sure Obama didn’t want them to investigate a political opponent.

You live in Russia.. you probably don't know that the Obama Administration had Trump under surveillance during the 2016 campaign.

And I’m pretty sure Biden has already been cleared of any wrong doing.

You live in Russia.. you probably don't know that Biden hasn't been investigated.. so what specifically what wrongdoing was he cleared of and by what investigating department?

QPQ isn’t the entire issue, you keep forgetting, that it’s against a political rival. That’s the main issue

You live in Russia.. I'm not sure you are quite the expert you are trying to be.

Suppa Hobbit Mage

11-07-2019, 10:11 AM

Suppa Hobbit Mage

11-07-2019, 10:12 AM

If I give you $5 and then you were to give me a hamburger, is that QPQ?

If I give you $5 and you told me... if you come back 9 more times, your 10th hamburger is free, and then you gave me a hamburger, is that QPQ?

If I came back 9 more times, and you gave me a hamburger for FREE, is that QPQ?

Then, what if you told me, if I don't eat that other dudes hamburgers, you'll sell me hamburgers for $4.50... IS THAT QPQ?

OMG THE WHOLE WORLD NEEDS TO BE INDICTED!

Seran

11-07-2019, 12:06 PM

And so far we have a transcript that doesn't come close to proving Trump was withholding aid until Ukraine gave Trump something in return, much less that he demanded Ukraine investigate Joe Biden in order to receive the aid.

Actually you have testimony from two high ranking officials that elements of the call were left out of the call summary. Two additional diplomat's have come out and stated verbatim that Guilliani on behalf of the President stated military funding would be held until the Ukraine publically announced an investigation of Hunter Biden and the Steele dossier in order to allow Trump to give a subsequent interview in Fox about it.

Third, your attempts to rewrite history, to ignore Congressional testimony given by first hand sources and your childish attempts to discredit witnesses are absolutely irrelevant to the fact the President will soon be facing an impeachment trial in front of the Senate.

Ashlander

11-07-2019, 12:15 PM

Actually you have testimony from two high ranking officials that elements of the call were left out of the call summary. Two additional diplomat's have come out and stated verbatim that Guilliani on behalf of the President stated military funding would be held until the Ukraine publically announced an investigation of Hunter Biden and the Steele dossier in order to allow Trump to give a subsequent interview in Fox about it.

Third, your attempts to rewrite history, to ignore Congressional testimony given by first hand sources and your childish attempts to discredit witnesses are absolutely irrelevant to the fact the President will soon be facing an impeachment trial in front of the Senate.

Senate will vote no and Trump will still be your president.

Suppa Hobbit Mage

11-07-2019, 12:17 PM

President will soon be facing an impeachment trial in front of the Senate.

True since November 2016, AMIRITE?

Methais

11-07-2019, 01:14 PM

Androidpk was trying to dox me.. and decided I had to be a bathtub installer who was divorced but was cheating on my wife with a girl who worked at McDonalds.

He literally wasn't good at anything... which is why his mom called him a "Good for nothing loser".

He also helped me discover that I'm actually a gym teacher at a Catholic school in New Orleans. Who knew? Not me.

And feel free to get me banned, not going to stop my lawyer from sending Kranar a subpoena for IP information on a couple of people.

I wonder how that's going... :lol:

Methais

11-07-2019, 01:40 PM

If there was no comment it was a positive rep. Neg reps require at least a '.' or something.

https://media.giphy.com/media/3og0IMJcSI8p6hYQXS/giphy.gif

That's what I thought at first too, but according to the source code (I don't have the rep addon running), it was Seranpk

https://i.imgur.com/47aE8d6.png

http://forum.gsplayers.com/member.php?248

When you click that link it takes you to:

https://i.imgur.com/1hKzuF6.png

His ID being 248 seems about right too, being an account from 2003.

Unless I looked at the source code wrong, but all the rep above and below me are green and from people with green rep, and the 12:17 timestamp matches the gray rep too.

Either way, my original statement still stands.
https://media2.giphy.com/media/RX3vhj311HKLe/source.gif

Methais

11-07-2019, 01:45 PM

True since November 2016, AMIRITE?

June 2015 actually, just in case he made it through the primaries and then pwned Hillary.

Seran

11-07-2019, 06:43 PM

Senate will vote no and Trump will still be your president.

That's pretty likely as well, but even that's okay, impeachment doesn't guarantee one result of the other. Just as an indictment doesn't decide innocence or guilt, a formal Impeachment doesn't determine the subsequent vote of the Senate.

There's a ton of really interesting case law coming out of the Court of Appeals and the DC Circuit Court concerning what is and is not executive privileged and identifying the President is not immune to subpeona.

There'll be huge repercussions for all parties in the decades to come. Particularly if the Supreme Court makes a ruling.

Suppa Hobbit Mage

11-07-2019, 06:46 PM

That's pretty likely as well, but even that's okay, impeachment doesn't guarantee one result of the other. Just as an indictment doesn't decide innocence or guilt, a formal Impeachment doesn't determine the subsequent vote of the Senate.

There's a ton of really interesting case law coming out of the Court of Appeals and the DC Circuit Court concerning what is and is not executive privileged and identifying the President is not immune to subpeona.

There'll be huge repercussions for all parties in the decades to come. Particularly if the Supreme Court makes a ruling.

why not just go back to posting on your original handle?

Parkbandit

11-08-2019, 08:45 AM

why not just go back to posting on your original handle?

I don't know why people think Seran is Androidpk.

Seran has been this stupid of years and years... he just didn't post very much between 2011 and 2019.. but if you go back, you will remember just how dumb he is.

Suppa Hobbit Mage

11-08-2019, 09:00 AM

I don't know why people think Seran is Androidpk.

Seran has been this stupid of years and years... he just didn't post very much between 2011 and 2019.. but if you go back, you will remember just how dumb he is.

I think they are similar if not the same because they both come off like law school dropouts who copy/paste big words to appear as if there are two thoughts in their head, but really it's just regurgitating party line talking points.

Seran

11-08-2019, 11:34 AM

I remember a time when people became adults and could discuss and debate different points of view without resulting to personal attacks to disguise their lack of understanding.

Suppa Hobbit Mage

11-08-2019, 11:38 AM

I remember a time when people became adults and could discuss and debate different points of view without resulting to personal attacks to disguise their lack of understanding.

LMAO.

Have you read your own posts?

~Rocktar~

11-08-2019, 11:54 AM

I remember a time when people became adults and could discuss and debate different points of view without resulting to personal attacks to disguise their lack of understanding.

OK Boomer.

Seran

11-08-2019, 01:31 PM

LMAO.

Have you read your own posts?

Absolutely and when attacked, you defend. If someone wants to debate, I debate. When someone like Dreaven, or it's alt accounts Methais and Gelston wants to throw rocks, I chuck them back.

Suppa Hobbit Mage

11-08-2019, 01:34 PM

Absolutely and when attacked, you defend. If someone wants to debate, I debate. When someone like Dreaven, or it's alt accounts Methais and Gelston wants to throw rocks, I chuck them back.

So who defended first? Whatever dude, you are living in a glass house.

Astray

11-08-2019, 01:34 PM

Absolutely and when attacked, you defend. If someone wants to debate, I debate. When someone like Dreaven, or it's alt accounts Methais and Gelston wants to throw rocks, I chuck them back.

LOL

Methais

11-08-2019, 03:21 PM

Absolutely and when attacked, you defend. If someone wants to debate, I debate. When someone like Dreaven, or it's alt accounts Methais and Gelston wants to throw rocks, I chuck them back.

Yes I'm totally Dreaven's alt.

THAT'S WHY WE'VE NEVER BEEN HEARD ON THE SAME PODCAST TOGETHER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

EDIT: Confirmed Seran is pk's alt. And cwolff's.

ClydeR

11-08-2019, 03:39 PM

Bolton decided to pull Trump's knife out of his back and point it at Trump.

Tgo01

11-08-2019, 03:44 PM

I remember a time when people became adults and could discuss and debate different points of view without resulting to personal attacks to disguise their lack of understanding.

The nerve on this guy.

Jeril

11-08-2019, 04:27 PM

Absolutely and when attacked, you defend. If someone wants to debate, I debate. When someone like Dreaven, or it's alt accounts Methais and Gelston wants to throw rocks, I chuck them back.

That is a very childish mindset for one who is trying to claim some form of maturity.

Jeril

11-08-2019, 04:28 PM

The nerve on this guy.

The nerve on YOUR FACE.

Tgo01

11-08-2019, 04:44 PM

The nerve on YOUR FACE.

:(

Parkbandit

11-08-2019, 05:20 PM

I remember a time when people became adults and could discuss and debate different points of view without resulting to personal attacks to disguise their lack of understanding.

https://media1.giphy.com/media/boaBx00ZV8SqI/giphy.gif

Absolutely and when attacked, you defend. If someone wants to debate, I debate. When someone like Dreaven, or it's alt accounts Methais and Gelston wants to throw rocks, I chuck them back.

https://media3.giphy.com/media/8VwkGKA5wXBN6/source.gif

Tgo01

11-09-2019, 12:07 AM

Jim Jordan was reassigned to the Intelligence committee, which for some reason is heading up the impeachment nonsense, and wouldn't you know it? He's being accused again of covering up sexual harassment while he was a coach. I'm sure this is totally a coincidence and not another left wing smear attack or anything of the sort!

Methais

11-09-2019, 11:02 AM

I remember a time when people became adults and could discuss and debate different points of view without resulting to personal attacks to disguise their lack of understanding.

Absolutely and when attacked, you defend. If someone wants to debate, I debate. When someone like Dreaven, or it's alt accounts Methais and Gelston wants to throw rocks, I chuck them back.

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn%3AANd9GcS5D-EQtP0KIjEkNMOML9gFlR9hmPKrsB5vnvrOFYNErMyg3nph

~Rocktar~

11-09-2019, 11:21 AM

This is awesome!

https://www.facebook.com/TheCJPearson/videos/468380107113921/

Gelston

11-09-2019, 02:35 PM

Did that retard call me an alt account of dreaven?

Astray

11-09-2019, 02:44 PM

Did that retard call me an alt account of dreaven?

Yes.

Suppa Hobbit Mage

11-09-2019, 02:47 PM

I don't think that was awesome. That's like the debates here, two people saying different things and not listening at all.

Ashlander

11-09-2019, 07:58 PM

Did that retard call me an alt account of dreaven?

Has anyone ever seen you and Dreaven in the same place at the same time?

Parkbandit

11-10-2019, 08:36 AM

This is awesome!

https://www.facebook.com/TheCJPearson/videos/468380107113921/

That literally sounds like a Republican vs. a Democrat arguing back and forth... not a politician vs. the media.

Neveragain

11-10-2019, 09:12 AM

That literally sounds like a Republican vs. a Democrat arguing back and forth... not a politician vs. the media.

Tapper even confirms it by referring to Jordan as "You guys".

Neveragain

11-10-2019, 09:19 AM

Has anyone ever seen you and Dreaven in the same place at the same time?

You can't eat at the chinese buffet if you don't have the duck sauce.

Back

11-11-2019, 09:05 AM

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/rudy-giuliani-associate-ukraine-investigate-bidens_n_5dc8addae4b0fcfb7f68b2cb

Giuliani Associate Says He Told Ukraine That Aid Was Contingent On Biden Probe: Report

Lev Parnas, one of Rudy Giuliani’s two indicted business associates, reportedly said that he told incoming Ukrainian leadership earlier this year to announce an investigation into the Bidens in exchange for U.S. military aid.

Parnas allegedly traveled to Kyiv just before Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky was inaugurated in May and told the incoming government to announce an investigation into President Donald Trump’s political rival Joe Biden, otherwise the U.S. would freeze military aid to the country, the Ukrainian-American businessman’s attorney Joseph A. Bondy told The New York Times in a report published Sunday.

Also contingent on the investigation announcement reportedly was Vice President Mike Pence’s attendance at Zelensky’s inauguration ceremony, according to Bondy. Pence never ended up attending Zelensky’s inauguration, according to the Times.

The remarks to the newspaper are one of the first signs that Parnas has flipped on Trump and his personal attorney in the impeachment investigation surrounding the United States president’s attempted extortion of Ukraine. The warning to Ukrainian leadership was allegedly at the direction of Giuliani, whom Bondy said Parnas believed to be acting under Trump’s instruction.

The business associate said Nov. 4 that he would be willing to testify in the House impeachment probe, a change of heart after Parnas refused to comply with House committees’ requests in October. The reconsideration came after Trump denied to reporters that he knew Parnas.

Suppa Hobbit Mage

11-11-2019, 09:44 AM

Everytime Backrash posts from Huffpost, I know AOL is still his homepage... because no one reads Huffpost on purpose.

Methais

11-11-2019, 09:49 AM

Everytime Backrash posts from Huffpost, I know AOL is still his homepage... because no one reads Huffpost on purpose.

It's much worse than that. Huffpost (https://www.huffpost.com/)is his home page on Internet Explorer.

On MS Edge, it's motherjones (www.motherjones.com)

On Firefox, it's thedailybeast (www.thedailybeast.com)

And on Chrome, it's set to this (https://shop.nordstrom.com/c/scarves-wraps)

Seran

11-11-2019, 10:53 AM

Rather insane that anyone thinks evidence and witness testimony will go away because it's reported from a media platform they dislike.

Methais

11-11-2019, 10:57 AM

Rather insane that anyone thinks evidence and witness testimony will go away because it's reported from a media platform they dislike.

I can't wait to watch your meltdown after impeachment goes nowhere.

Suppa Hobbit Mage

11-11-2019, 12:09 PM

Rather insane that anyone thinks evidence and witness testimony will go away because it's reported from a media platform they dislike.

How much time do you spend on Breitbart, reading Michelle Malkin, and National Review?

I don't spend any, because I know how they skew. I don't dislike HuffPost, I think it's like the national enquirer.

Wall Street Journal is a great read, but I doubt you or Backrash read anything if its not reproduced on Mother Jones, The Verge or some other crazy ass opinion site.

Methais

11-11-2019, 12:24 PM

How much time do you spend on Breitbart, reading Michelle Malkin, and National Review?

I don't spend any, because I know how they skew. I don't dislike HuffPost, I think it's like the national enquirer.

Wall Street Journal is a great read, but I doubt you or Backrash read anything if its not reproduced on Mother Jones, The Verge or some other crazy ass opinion site.

In before he tells you you read nothing but Breitbart anyway because he just knows it must be true.

You're probably another Dreaven alt too. Racist.

Reported.

And backtraced.

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/XVfWslowmoI/hqdefault.jpg

Seran

11-11-2019, 01:57 PM

Wall Street Journal is a great read, but I doubt you or Backrash read anything if its not reproduced on Mother Jones, The Verge or some other crazy ass opinion site.

Actually the Wall Street Journal is reporting the same thing. Are they also now a fringe leftist news source? Is AP? Al Jazeera? You're confusing reported fact, with spin.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/giuliani-associates-urged-ukraines-prior-president-to-open-biden-election-probes-11573247707

Suppa Hobbit Mage

11-11-2019, 02:17 PM

Actually the Wall Street Journal is reporting the same thing. Are they also now a fringe leftist news source? Is AP? Al Jazeera? You're confusing reported fact, with spin.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/giuliani-associates-urged-ukraines-prior-president-to-open-biden-election-probes-11573247707

Read them side by side.

Seran

11-11-2019, 04:58 PM

Read them side by side.

And your point is what exactly?

Tgo01

11-11-2019, 05:33 PM

Seran

11-11-2019, 06:30 PM

Big surprise! Schiff is blocking almost each and every witness the Republicans have asked for. As if you needed more proof this entire "investigation" is complete bullshit. But I'm sure Seran will find some reason to brush this off. Oh, right, he thinks we should all put our complete and total faith into a complete partisan traitor piece of shit such as Schiff because reasons.

Are you aware of anyone other than Hunter Biden and the anonymous whistleblower that have been sought-after for depositions that were denied? Can you please cite why you think Hunter Biden's testimony is relevant to the impeachment of the President? I truly hope you answer this.

The whistleblower has requested anonymity and so refuses to testify in person. The law protects that right. Should Nunes be able to ignore the law in order to expose the whistleblower to possible retaliation?

Tgo01

11-11-2019, 06:58 PM

Are you aware of anyone other than Hunter Biden and the anonymous whistleblower that have been sought-after for depositions that were denied?

Am I aware of any other witnesses that have been denied other than the two most important witnesses into this whole sham of an investigation?

Yes:
Devon Archer
Alexandra Chalupa
Nellie Ohr

And that's just what he has either flat out denied so far or has said he plans to deny.

Can you please cite why you think Hunter Biden's testimony is relevant to the impeachment of the President? I truly hope you answer this.

Are you fucking serious right now? This whole thing supposedly has to do with Hunter Biden.

Dude, look, I understand you are kept alive on nothing but CNN and MSNBC being injected directly into your veins, but not all of us are so easily fooled.

Prosecutor: Hey this guy embezzled a billion dollars from Jeff Bezos! Think we should call Jeff Bezos to testify?
Seran: What for?

I can't even believe this is an honest question.

Seran

11-11-2019, 07:12 PM

Am I aware of any other witnesses that have been denied other than the two most important witnesses into this whole sham of an investigation?

Yes:
Devon Archer
Alexandra Chalupa
Nellie Ohr

And that's just what he has either flat out denied so far or has said he plans to deny.

Are you fucking serious right now? This whole thing supposedly has to do with Hunter Biden.

Dude, look, I understand you are kept alive on nothing but CNN and MSNBC being injected directly into your veins, but not all of us are so easily fooled.

Prosecutor: Hey this guy embezzled a billion dollars from Jeff Bezos! Think we should call Jeff Bezos to testify?
Seran: What for?

I can't even believe this is an honest question.

No. This whole thing is about the President holding up military assistance to the Ukraine in exchange for announcing they're investigating Hunter Biden and Russian involvement in 2016 election interference. If you're implying Hunter's testimony is required to validate the President's request, I'll point out that the President, nor anyone on the RNC has publically defined relevance. Further, Hunter Biden is not being investigated for impeachment, though it's obvious you and the RNC would like to pretend it is. For that reason, I doubt Mr Archer will be called as their is no relevance.

Nellie Ohr and Alexandra Chalupa also have no relevance, beyond the RNC wishing to make this about anyone but Trump and his alleged misdeeds.

Tgo01

11-11-2019, 07:21 PM

No. This whole thing is about the President holding up military assistance to the Ukraine in exchange for announcing they're investigating Hunter Biden

Yes exactly. Glad you finally fucking get it.

Suppa Hobbit Mage

11-11-2019, 07:33 PM

And your point is what exactly?

Well, it's not really a point. It's known far and wide, I was just pointing it out.

Seran

11-11-2019, 07:36 PM

Yes exactly. Glad you finally fucking get it.

If your point was to get me to put Hunter Biden in a sentence, congratulations on your achievement. However if your goal was to make everyone think conducting an investigation of Hunter Biden by making him a witness during Trump's impeachment inquiry was relevant, then I'm sorry but most people will see through that bit of misdirection.

Tgo01

11-11-2019, 07:47 PM

If your point was to get me to put Hunter Biden in a sentence, congratulations on your achievement. However if your goal was to make everyone think conducting an investigation of Hunter Biden by making him a witness during Trump's impeachment inquiry was relevant, then I'm sorry but most people will see through that bit of misdirection.

Just stop already. You don't have to suck Adam Schiff's dick in each and every post you make.

It's really rather simple but I'll explain it to you in detail in the hopes that you might actually get it, although something tells me you already "get it" but don't want to admit it because of the aforementioned dick sucking.

Trump asks Ukraine to tackle corruption, then in a more specific sense mentions Hunter Biden and the whole Burisma fiasco.
Clearly Trump is referencing the Burisma fiasco as an example of corruption he wants Ukraine to investigate.

Now a normal person, so this excludes you, would say to themselves "Maybe we should ask Hunter Biden some questions to see if maybe Trump had a legitimate reason to ask Ukraine to investigate Burisma, Hunter Biden, and Joe Biden's role in that whole mess."

But a non-normal person, e.g. you and others suffering from TDS, look at this and say "But Biden has already been cleared by...well no one in particular but CNN has told me he's been cleared so no need to investigate that!!!"

See you don't really care about justice or truth seeking, you only care about seeing Trump impeached because you are nothing but a soulless Democratic operative at this point.

Seran

11-11-2019, 08:25 PM

Trump asks Ukraine to tackle corruption, then in a more specific sense mentions Hunter Biden and the whole Burisma fiasco.
Clearly Trump is referencing the Burisma fiasco as an example of corruption he wants Ukraine to investigate.

This is a major step for you, admitting that Trump asked the Ukrainian President for an investigation into Biden, I'm very proud of you. What I would like you to consider is in Laura Cooper's testimony released today, she reiterated that the Department of Defense already determined that Ukraine has made the necessary steps in reducing "general" corruption and cleared the funding for US equipment to be released. Only that was sidelined by the President. This is the entire argument by House investigators, that President conditioned support on the aforementioned investigations. I get that the RNC and White House are demanding that "Biden" be said as often and loudly as possible to sidetrack impeachment inquiry, but surely you understand that the President cannot require, nor ask other countries to investigate his rivals for political gain?

Now an irrational person, so this excludes you, would say to themselves "Maybe we should ask Hunter Biden some questions to see if maybe Trump had a legitimate reason to ask Ukraine to investigate Burisma, Hunter Biden, and Joe Biden's role in that whole mess."

I thank you for identifying my chief argument, that substantiating the President's motive isn't on the table, so I fixed your adjective. The President has his own attorney general in his pocket for investigating perceived crimes, only wait, Barr has already denied any involvement in this whole scandal AND the Ukraine has already cleared Hunter Biden. Sooo.. how is this not an exercise in Trump requesting interference into the American electoral system..again?

Tgo01

11-11-2019, 08:53 PM

This is a major step for you, admitting that Trump asked the Ukrainian President for an investigation into Biden, I'm very proud of you.

Uh, we've known that from almost day 1 because Trump almost immediately released the transcript. The only thing in question was did Trump threaten to withhold aid until they investigated Burisma or Biden's son, which the transcript shows us no he didn't, also the fact that Ukraine never investigated Burisma or Biden and yet still received the aid also suggests that aid was not withheld until those conditions were met.

The rest of your post is distraction nonsense because you don't want to just address the main point that you asked me to explain to you. That is that it's perfectly reasonable to question Biden, Burisma, or anyone connected to see if Trump had a reason to want them investigated. Because again you aren't interested in truth or justice, you are only interested in blood, just like every other rabid, frothing at the mouth sufferer of TDS.

Seran

11-11-2019, 09:34 PM

Actually you're not getting my point which is it's entirely unreasonable to ask for something so far beyond the scope of the inquiry, which is the President's quid pro quo. Not agreeing with you isn't a lack of understanding.

It's not the Democrats job to do what the Ukraine and the Justice Department is unwilling to do (a second time in Ukrain's instance.)

Wrathbringer

11-11-2019, 09:41 PM

This is a major step for you, admitting that Trump asked the Ukrainian President for an investigation into Biden, I'm very proud of you. What I would like you to consider is in Laura Cooper's testimony released today, she reiterated that the Department of Defense already determined that Ukraine has made the necessary steps in reducing "general" corruption and cleared the funding for US equipment to be released. Only that was sidelined by the President. This is the entire argument by House investigators, that President conditioned support on the aforementioned investigations. I get that the RNC and White House are demanding that "Biden" be said as often and loudly as possible to sidetrack impeachment inquiry, but surely you understand that the President cannot require, nor ask other countries to investigate his rivals for political gain?

I thank you for identifying my chief argument, that substantiating the President's motive isn't on the table, so I fixed your adjective. The President has his own attorney general in his pocket for investigating perceived crimes, only wait, Barr has already denied any involvement in this whole scandal AND the Ukraine has already cleared Hunter Biden. Sooo.. how is this not an exercise in Trump requesting interference into the American electoral system..again?

lol @ your rep :lol:

Tgo01

11-11-2019, 09:42 PM

Actually you're not getting my point which is it's entirely unreasonable to ask for something so far beyond the scope of the inquiry, which is the President's quid pro quo. Not agreeing with you isn't a lack of understanding.

Okay let's cut the bullshit and see if you can actually engage in a conversation without deflecting and distracting.

For one minute let's just say Trump had good reason to want Burisma/Biden investigated, do you think it would have been acceptable for him to ask Ukraine to investigate? Not for a quid pro quo, just a simple "Hey I think Burisma is pretty corrupt, I think their hiring of Hunter Biden was also corrupt and I think Joe Biden's actions as Vice President were also corrupt, care to take a gander at that?"

Is that wrong, yes or no?

Seran

11-11-2019, 10:17 PM

Tgo01

11-11-2019, 10:29 PM

Okay, I'll grant your premise for the sake of your hypothetical, but with a distinction. If and only if Hunter Biden were currently on the board of Burisma and the aid being paid to Ukraine were for energy infrastructure or purchases, then yes it would be fair for Ukraine to investigate.

However this is not the case. Not only is he no longer with Burisma, but the military aid package is actually a Government to Government purchase of military equipment and defensive weapons. Burisma is a privately held company who is in no way associated with military purchase or deployment. This is why a current investigation is not only irrelevant, but a silly distraction engineered by the RNC.

My hypothetical had absolutely nothing to do with aid. Also crimes don't cease being crimes just because the person no longer works for a company that committed said crimes.

So try again.

Seran

11-12-2019, 12:51 AM

My hypothetical had absolutely nothing to do with aid. Also crimes don't cease being crimes just because the person no longer works for a company that committed said crimes.

So try again.

Ah, so your hypothetical had nothing to do with the topic, or you're moving goalposts. That's too bad, I was pretty impressed with how insightful your hypothetical was in making what I perceived your argument to be.

But now you point out that my interpretation was wrong, well I'll just have to wait for a better argument.

Tgo01

11-12-2019, 12:58 AM

Ah, so your hypothetical had nothing to do with the topic, or you're moving goalposts.

It has everything to do with the topic and I think you finally figured it out which is why you're doing what you do best: deflect and spin like there is no tomorrow.

I'll ask again just to see if you're actually interested in conversation like you claimed a couple of days ago.

If Trump had good reason to believe corruption occurred surrounding the Burisma/Hunter Biden/Joe Biden mess and HAVING NOTHING TO DO WITH AID, do you think it would be wrong of Trump to ask Ukraine to look into it? Or would you consider this "digging up dirt" on a political opponent, even if Trump had actual good reason to believe corruption happened?

Suppa Hobbit Mage

11-12-2019, 09:21 AM

It's not the Democrats job to do what the Ukraine and the Justice Department is unwilling to do (a second time in Ukrain's instance.)

Was it Joe Biden's job to withhold a billion dollars in aid unless they fired the lawyer investigating his son?

Suppa Hobbit Mage

11-12-2019, 09:24 AM

WAIT WAIT WAIT. Let me rephrase.

Was it Joe Biden's job to ask Ukraine to do THIS (fire lawyer investigating his son) for THAT (a billion dollars in US aid).

Suppa Hobbit Mage

11-12-2019, 09:26 AM

As I've stated before, all you have to do is recognize that QPQ is literally how we deal with everyone in the world.

Parkbandit

11-12-2019, 10:39 AM

Okay, I'll grant your premise for the sake of your hypothetical, but with a distinction. If and only if Hunter Biden were currently on the board of Burisma and the aid being paid to Ukraine were for energy infrastructure or purchases, then yes it would be fair for Ukraine to investigate.

However this is not the case. Not only is he no longer with Burisma, but the military aid package is actually a Government to Government purchase of military equipment and defensive weapons. Burisma is a privately held company who is in no way associated with military purchase or deployment. This is why a current investigation is not only irrelevant, but a silly distraction engineered by the RNC.

50K a month to someone with literally zero experience with the industry... and when the investigation started... the then Vice President stopped the investigation and got the head of the investigation fired.. then bragged about it...

Yea... nothing to see here at all..................

https://media0.giphy.com/media/ZiDnfvNB4PjVu/giphy.gif

Seran

11-12-2019, 10:51 AM

It has everything to do with the topic and I think you finally figured it out which is why you're doing what you do best: deflect and spin like there is no tomorrow.

I'll ask again just to see if you're actually interested in conversation like you claimed a couple of days ago.

If Trump had good reason to believe corruption occurred surrounding the Burisma/Hunter Biden/Joe Biden mess and HAVING NOTHING TO DO WITH AID, do you think it would be wrong of Trump to ask Ukraine to look into it? Or would you consider this "digging up dirt" on a political opponent, even if Trump had actual good reason to believe corruption happened?

Just because you're rehashing the same question doesn't change my answer. If you want to pick it apart and discuss the points, feel free, but I'm not as talented a copy and paste mechanic as you.

Seran

11-12-2019, 10:53 AM

As I've stated before, all you have to do is recognize that QPQ is literally how we deal with everyone in the world.

I don't grant your premise. Diplomacy on behalf of the United States is one thing. Pushing your unsubstantiated conspiracies for personal political gain is aj abuse of power.

Suppa Hobbit Mage

11-12-2019, 11:39 AM

I don't grant your premise. Diplomacy on behalf of the United States is one thing. Pushing your unsubstantiated conspiracies for personal political gain is aj abuse of power.

Substantiate your third sentence only using the transcript or 1st person testimony to hearing the call.

Methais

11-12-2019, 11:56 AM

No. This whole thing is about the President holding up military assistance to the Ukraine in exchange for announcing they're investigating Hunter Biden and Russian involvement in 2016 election interference. If you're implying Hunter's testimony is required to validate the President's request, I'll point out that the President, nor anyone on the RNC has publically defined relevance. Further, Hunter Biden is not being investigated for impeachment, though it's obvious you and the RNC would like to pretend it is. For that reason, I doubt Mr Archer will be called as their is no relevance.

Nellie Ohr and Alexandra Chalupa also have no relevance, beyond the RNC wishing to make this about anyone but Trump and his alleged misdeeds.

You're a giant tard.

And you think Trump's going to be removed from office :lol: :lol: :lol:

:lol:

Seran

11-12-2019, 12:50 PM

Substantiate your third sentence only using the transcript or 1st person testimony to hearing the call.

Democrats have first person accounting of the call, as well as the call summary document furnished by the White House. If you've read the bipartisan depositions conducted by the House, it's looking pretty grim.

Suppa Hobbit Mage

11-12-2019, 01:15 PM

Democrats have first person accounting of the call, as well as the call summary document furnished by the White House. If you've read the bipartisan depositions conducted by the House, it's looking pretty grim.

If you've read them, you'd note that everything leads back to a single person who THINKS the president may have done something wrong, but has literally said he did not hear QPQ.

Archigeek

11-12-2019, 04:43 PM

https://politics.theonion.com/tips-for-testifying-before-congress-1839724614

Suppa Hobbit Mage

11-12-2019, 04:59 PM

https://politics.theonion.com/tips-for-testifying-before-congress-1839724614

That was funny stuff, thanks for sharing!

Tgo01

11-12-2019, 05:12 PM

Just because you're rehashing the same question doesn't change my answer. If you want to pick it apart and discuss the points, feel free, but I'm not as talented a copy and paste mechanic as you.

Because you didn’t answer my question, you deflected and distracted like the pro you are.

Tgo01

11-12-2019, 05:16 PM

If you've read them, you'd note that everything leads back to a single person who THINKS the president may have done something wrong, but has literally said he did not hear QPQ.

It’s pretty funny. Now that the transcripts have been released, as opposed to just hearing Schitt’s spin of the testimony, we can now see that the Democrat’s supposed star witness Vindman said the transcript released by the White House was accurate and 99% of his testimony is all his opinion and feelings on the matter. Oh yeah and that Schitthead hardly let Republicans ask any tough questions of Vindman.

Tgo01

11-12-2019, 07:23 PM

The "whistleblower" has raised a quarter of a million dollars on GoFundMe. An anonymous whistleblower getting rich off of this? Who even knows where these donations are coming from or if he was bribed to begin with to start this shit and this was his way of legally accepting said bribe? Nope! Nothing suspicious going on here!

Solkern

11-13-2019, 04:52 AM

I’m currently in Ukraine right now actually. Word around here is, it was definitely a QPQ, Ukraine is just afraid of the backlash from going against the current administration and admitting it.

Back

11-13-2019, 05:16 AM

Live at 10am.

https://youtu.be/CXlbDEATZwM

ClydeR

11-13-2019, 08:58 AM

If you've read them, you'd note that everything leads back to a single person who THINKS the president may have done something wrong, but has literally said he did not hear QPQ.

Who is the single person?

Suppa Hobbit Mage

11-13-2019, 10:14 AM

Is today the Democrat TV show exposing themselves as partisan hacks? I think it starts today, right?

Some Rogue

11-13-2019, 11:10 AM

Is today the Democrat TV show exposing themselves as partisan hacks? I think it starts today, right?

well so far, the Republicans are chugging hard to stay even in that race.

Seran

11-13-2019, 11:53 AM

Is today the Democrat TV show exposing themselves as partisan hacks? I think it starts today, right?

Don't forget the career diplomats and politicians offering first hand accounting of the illegal acts. Using your logic they should be disregarded entirely because you perceive them as partisan.

Back

11-13-2019, 12:01 PM

Nune's opening statement was a lengthy and detailed conspiracy theory.

gemstonefella

11-13-2019, 12:20 PM

Isn't that the guy suing a cow?

Methais

11-13-2019, 12:28 PM

Live at 10am.

https://youtu.be/CXlbDEATZwM

I look forward to seeing you express your disappointment again when this circus is all said and done with.

Seran

11-13-2019, 12:30 PM

Career diplomat and Trump appointed Deputy Assistant Secretary George Kent testified today that according to his first hand involvement, there is no factual basis for allegations that then Vice President Biden interfered in Ukraine's investigation and that Biden was acting in accordance with the official policy of the United States.

Though you poor misguided Trumpers will probably say he's a partisan and isn't qualified to offer evidence. Hopefully one day you'll wake up to the stench of your own bullshit.

Seran

11-13-2019, 12:43 PM

I wouldn't worry though, Rep Jim Jordan and the other Republican committee members brought some very helpful cardboard signs. I'm sure that'll help discredit testimony.

Parkbandit

11-13-2019, 01:04 PM

Hopefully one day you'll wake up to the stench of your own bullshit.

https://media.giphy.com/media/3Wun4UTM2Xqzm/giphy.gif

Suppa Hobbit Mage

11-13-2019, 04:49 PM

How many episodes will Schitt run this season? I hear the plot line has a new twist, now it's um... goddamnit, I can't keep up. Was it obstruction? collusion? corruption? high crimes and misdemeanours? QPQ? Whatever, man this show has a ton of exciting turns.

Can't wait for the exciting cliffhanger until the 2020 reelection!

gemstonefella

11-13-2019, 05:09 PM

I wouldn't worry though, Rep Jim Jordan and the other Republican committee members brought some very helpful cardboard signs. I'm sure that'll help discredit testimony.

Gym should start worrying about his own problems. Fucking scumbag.

gemstonefella

11-13-2019, 05:11 PM

I love how in Nunes’s opening statement he derided the media and then the GOP has three newspaper entered into the record during the preceding.

Tgo01

11-13-2019, 05:35 PM

Seran

11-13-2019, 05:46 PM

Seran

11-13-2019, 05:50 PM

I love how in Nunes’s opening statement he derided the media and then the GOP has three newspaper entered into the record during the preceding.

It was a pretty laughable moment, as if an opinion piece were somehow more credible than the testimony of the two career diplomats.

Democrats didn't really drive their point home until then end when they summarized the obstruction, self dealing, quid pro quo and attempted blackmail. Two Democrats get major points for pointing out funds weren't released until the whistleblower complaint was given to Congress and the House announced it's investigation. Throws a real wrench into the "no harm, no foul" argument used repeatedly by Jordan.

Tgo01

11-13-2019, 05:51 PM

Witness testimony is pretty substantial, particularly when they confirm document's subpeonad and not turned over were in the possession of the State and White House. By following that line of questioning they ensure an obstruction of justice charge.

Republicans were on a very narrow footing at hearing demanding written materials they know damn well exist, but haven't been turned over to Congress.

Witness testimony tends to deal with facts, like they saw Joe murder Bob, they heard Joe said he wanted to murder Bob. Not it’s their opinion that Biden didn’t do anything wrong. Why are you Democrats still pushing that dumb shit when there has been no investigation? What a shitshow our legal system has turned into if "witnesses" can now start testifying with "In my opinion Joe murdered Bob."

Seran

11-13-2019, 05:51 PM

Gym should start worrying about his own problems. Fucking scumbag.

Protecting a doctor who was molesting his patients is going to cost him.

Seran

11-13-2019, 05:58 PM

Witness testimony tends to deal with facts, like they saw Joe murder Bob, they heard Joe said he wanted to murder Bob. Not it’s their opinion that Biden didn’t do anything wrong. Why are you Democrats still pushing that dumb shit when there has been no investigation? What a shitshow our legal system has turned into if "witnesses" can now start testifying with "In my opinion Joe murdered Bob."

This is the investigation of Trump's alleged misdeeds. Next may come formal articles of impeachment laying out the charges derived from the Impeachment inquiry. Finally will come the trial.

Seran

11-13-2019, 06:02 PM

It may all be a great civics lesson on how a formal Impeachment Inquiry takes place, because according to Wallace with FoxNews there's only about a 20% chance Senate Republicans would vote to convict.

However what we've proven, as with Nixon and Deep Throat, that witness testimony isn't overlooked by the people and public opinion can turn even the most loyal Congress

Even if the executive is hiding and failing to produce evidence subpeonad, Congress has it's constitutional duty to investigate, impeachment and try.

Tgo01

11-13-2019, 06:15 PM

This is the investigation of Trump's alleged misdeeds. Next may come formal articles of impeachment laying out the charges derived from the Impeachment inquiry. Finally will come the trial.

You keep saying this. "THIS isn't where 'facts' come into play, that's in the next part!!!" You said that during the secret meetings as well. I really feel bad about thinking you were Androidpk now. Androidpk at least pretended he had his own thoughts, you are just willing a walking, talking puppet of Schiff. If this were a larger platform like Reddit or Facebook I would bet money you were employed by Schiff or another corrupt Democrat in the House or Senate.

If you ever come back, Androidpk, I'm sorry for thinking you were the biggest piece of shit in the politics folder because of your politics. You are still by far the biggest piece of shit on the PC because of other shit you did though, but as far as politics go you're just the second biggest piece of shit.

Tgo01

11-13-2019, 06:44 PM

How many times did witnesses cite a news article as their source of information? I don't have the answer, I'm curious if anyone else does.

Seran

11-13-2019, 06:53 PM

You keep saying this. "THIS isn't where 'facts' come into play, that's in the next part!!!" You said that during the secret meetings as well. I really feel bad about thinking you were Androidpk now. Androidpk at least pretended he had his own thoughts, you are just willing a walking, talking puppet of Schiff. If this were a larger platform like Reddit or Facebook I would bet money you were employed by Schiff or another corrupt Democrat in the House or Senate.

If you ever come back, Androidpk, I'm sorry for thinking you were the biggest piece of shit in the politics folder because of your politics. You are still by far the biggest piece of shit on the PC because of other shit you did though, but as far as politics go you're just the second biggest piece of shit.

Keep it classy.

Suppa Hobbit Mage

11-13-2019, 06:56 PM

Protecting a doctor who was molesting his patients is going to cost him.

like everyone who protected Epstein? Get real, that shit happens and is happening everywhere and all the time. Everyone with any power as a politician has similar stories.

Suppa Hobbit Mage

11-13-2019, 06:59 PM

Tgo01

11-13-2019, 07:09 PM

like everyone who protected Epstein? Get real, that shit happens and is happening everywhere and all the time. Everyone with any power as a politician has similar stories.

The Democrats are just jokes at this point.

ABC is literally interrogating their employees and firing anyone they suspect is the whistleblower in the whole Epstein thing, including an innocent woman, the protected class Democrats pretend to care about, and Democrats don't give a single shit.

But this Jim Jordan shit is coming up AGAIN, right as the public "impeachment" hearings get started, and they are like "Look at this child molesting fool."

I honestly don't know how anyone can be a Democrat at this point. Not saying you have to be a Republican, but why are you okay with what Democrats are doing and have been doing for years now?

A Republican gets caught saying something that maybe, kind of, sort of could be construed as racist? Nope! That SOB has gotta go! A Democrat governor gets caught wearing blackface, the Lt Gov was accused by multiple women of rape, and the AG also gets caught wearing blackface? No problem, keep supporting them and keep voting Democrat!

Remember how Roy Moore simply couldn't win because it was unacceptable for a "pedophile" to be elected? Virginia literally elected someone who was convicted for having sex with an underage girl, because Democrat.

gemstonefella

11-13-2019, 07:16 PM

like everyone who protected Epstein? Get real, that shit happens and is happening everywhere and all the time. Everyone with any power as a politician has similar stories.

Everyone? That's quite a blanket statement.

gemstonefella

11-13-2019, 07:17 PM

The Democrats are just jokes at this point.

ABC is literally interrogating their employees and firing anyone they suspect is the whistleblower in the whole Epstein thing, including an innocent woman, the protected class Democrats pretend to care about, and Democrats don't give a single shit.

But this Jim Jordan shit is coming up AGAIN, right as the public "impeachment" hearings get started, and they are like "Look at this child molesting fool."

I honestly don't know how anyone can be a Democrat at this point. Not saying you have to be a Republican, but why are you okay with what Democrats are doing and have been doing for years now?

A Republican gets caught saying something that maybe, kind of, sort of could be construed as racist? Nope! That SOB has gotta go! A Democrat governor gets caught wearing blackface, the Lt Gov was accused by multiple women of rape, and the AG also gets caught wearing blackface? No problem, keep supporting them and keep voting Democrat!

Remember how Roy Moore simply couldn't win because it was unacceptable for a "pedophile" to be elected? Virginia literally elected someone who was convicted for having sex with an underage girl, because Democrat.

Nobody is calling Gym a pedophile. He turned a blind eye to a team doctor committing sexual assaults. He's just a scumbag.

Tgo01

11-13-2019, 07:20 PM

Nobody is calling Gym a pedophile.

Nobody? Maybe not on the PC but I've seen plenty of people call him a pedophile, whether they are just being assholes or are ignorant of the situation and think he is a pedophile.

He turned a blind eye to a team doctor committing sexual assaults. He's just a scumbag.

At least one of the accusers has already walked that back, other accusers didn't even accuse him of that, but rather said he MUST have known what was happening simply because he was employed there at the time. In fact were there any victims who said they knew for sure Jim Jordan knew what was happening but decided to do nothing? Last I looked into this everyone was just saying he must have known or should have known.

gemstonefella

11-13-2019, 07:20 PM

Tgo01

11-13-2019, 07:32 PM

Would love to get to the bottom of the Epstein thing. Lots of people have like to have seen him offed. Almost like a shitty hollywood movie. My bet is the royal family hitman, in the cell, with the rope.

Do you care about ABC covering up for Epstein and the Clintons and are now firing innocent employees in an attempt to find the whistleblower who told the world they were covering up for Epstein and the Clintons?

Suppa Hobbit Mage

11-13-2019, 07:45 PM

Everyone? That's quite a blanket statement.

how so? I’m stating fact. Everyone who covered his shit is currently walking free. It’s cost no one anything.

Tgo01

11-13-2019, 07:50 PM

Adam Shitthead is now lying through his teeth by claiming he has no idea who the whistleblower is.

How can he claim to not know who the whistleblower is and also forbid Republicans from asking questions in which he claims will reveal the identity of the whistleblower?

Sounds like Adam Schitt is full of schitt.

gemstonefella

11-13-2019, 07:51 PM

I thought it was CBS got the ABC employee fired after she leaked the video? I didn't see anything about the Clinton's linked to it. I don't read many right wing conspiracy sites though.

Did she have an NDA?

To be entirely honest, as soon as I hear the name Project Veritas linked with something, I tune it out. Too many past transgressions of faking/selectively editing videos to take them seriously.

gemstonefella

11-13-2019, 07:53 PM

how so? I’m stating fact. Everyone who covered his shit is currently walking free. It’s cost no one anything.

Everyone with any power as a politician has similar stories.

That statement.

gemstonefella

11-13-2019, 07:56 PM

Nobody? Maybe not on the PC but I've seen plenty of people call him a pedophile, whether they are just being assholes or are ignorant of the situation and think he is a pedophile.

At least one of the accusers has already walked that back, other accusers didn't even accuse him of that, but rather said he MUST have known what was happening simply because he was employed there at the time. In fact were there any victims who said they knew for sure Jim Jordan knew what was happening but decided to do nothing? Last I looked into this everyone was just saying he must have known or should have known.

I'm sure Coach Paterno was wrongly accused also.

Tgo01

11-13-2019, 07:58 PM

I thought it was CBS got the ABC employee fired after she leaked the video? I didn't see anything about the Clinton's linked to it. I don't read many right wing conspiracy sites though.

You apparently know almost nothing about what is going on here.

The ABC reporter said on video that she had the Epstein story and she got everyone, she listed Epstein and the Clintons as the people who she would have exposed. This is on video, it's not a "right wing conspiracy" theory, but it's interesting you get your facts from left wing conspiracy sites who claim this is a right wing conspiracy theory.

Also ABC determined (wrongly I might add) that the person who leaked now worked for CBS so ABC told CBS about it and CBS wrongfully fired said employee. ABC is now literally investigating their own employees in an attempt to fire the whistleblower. They are sifting through all employee emails, they are sequestering certain employees, they are encouraging employees to turn on their fellow peers, they are interrogating employees, and more. All because someone dared to tell the world that ABC was covering for Epstein and the Clintons during an election year in which Hillary Clinton was the Democrat nominee.

To be entirely honest, as soon as I hear the name Project Veritas linked with something, I tune it out. Too many past transgressions of faking/selectively editing videos to take them seriously.

And this is exactly what the media wanted to do, to get people to automatically dismiss anything Project Veritas does. And hey look, they did an excellent job. You are now defending the practice of covering for child rapists, covering for people who knew about child rapists but did nothing simply because they are Democrats, and firing employees for exposing the company for defending child rapists. All because the media has lied to you and manipulated you in the past to automatically dismiss what Project Vertias does.

The so called news in this country is nothing but a joke these days, they are propagandists using the freedom of the press in this country as a shield against their nefarious bullshit.

Educate yourself.

gemstonefella

11-13-2019, 08:13 PM

Educate myself......lol.

Ok, let me go listen to Rush, hook up the Blaze and Breibart, and look at some highly edited Project Veritas videos.

Suppa Hobbit Mage

11-13-2019, 08:23 PM

Everyone with any power as a politician has similar stories.

That statement.

Oh, you got me there. Yeah, not EVERY politician has similar stories.

Tgo01

11-13-2019, 08:25 PM

Educate myself......lol.

Ok, let me go listen to Rush, hook up the Blaze and Breibart, and look at some highly edited Project Veritas videos.

It's pretty fascinating. I say Democrats don't care what ABC is doing but will pretend to give a shit about Jim Jordan's accusations, and you prove my point perfectly.

I bet you don't even know what the supposed "highly edited" Project Veritas videos are without Googling it and having to get the information from CNN, MSNBC, ABC, NYT, Washington Post, Vox, HuffPost, or some other far left leaning news rag.

Suppa Hobbit Mage

11-13-2019, 08:25 PM

What videos have Project Veritas faked? I thought they were all real videos. Don't get me wrong, they are just like MotherJones and the Verge and any other far left or far right anything.

gemstonefella

11-13-2019, 08:29 PM

You would be wrong.

gemstonefella

11-13-2019, 08:32 PM

The ones I remember are Acorn, Planned Parenthood, NPR and some congresswoman. The congresswoman one was him trying to "seduce" her to get something.....one of his own employees dropped the dime on him. Pretty sure there were more.

gemstonefella

11-13-2019, 08:36 PM

They are highly edited, questions to answers used out of sequence, context left out completely, "stings" attempted.

It's like really bad reality TV....edited to high hell. If you've ever seen a reality TV show filmed(I have), you'd know what I mean.

Tgo01

11-13-2019, 08:42 PM

gemstonefella

11-13-2019, 08:49 PM

Because CNN told you this, right?

It's pretty easy to research. Hell, check out the Blaze.

gemstonefella

11-13-2019, 08:51 PM

I wonder if he ever paid the settlement over the highly edited Acorn videos.

gemstonefella

11-13-2019, 09:00 PM

Because CNN told you this, right?

I actually did end up watching CNN for most of the day, I started on Fox but switched over when Fox cut to commercial as Shifty Schiff started to talk after the opening statements. CNN showed it all commercial free with ZERO opinion segments or news reports during the breaks.

Tgo01

11-13-2019, 09:02 PM

I wonder if he ever paid the settlement over the highly edited Acorn videos.

It's funny you keep saying they are "highly edited" videos and yet recognize that he has been sued a few times because of what he records people saying. In the case of the Acorn video you are talking about, unless there is another lawsuit he settled regarding Acorn I am unaware of, he recorded himself talking with an Acorn employee about bringing in girls to the US for prostitution, the employee on the video was going along with everything.

What James O'Keefe didn't know was that the employee was supposedly pretending to go along with everything because he called the police right afterwards.

But that's strange, if all he does is edit the videos to make things look bad then the guy never went along with everything and James instead used his magical editing powers to just make it look like the guy was going along with everything.

Have you even bothered to watch his videos of CNN where they have employees such as Van Jones admitting that the whole Russia thing was most likely bullshit but CNN wanted to keep pushing it anyways because it was good for ratings? Was that another case of James O'Keefe using a magical video editing program that no one else has access to where he can make it seem like people are saying things they aren't really saying?

Astray

11-13-2019, 09:05 PM

It's pretty easy to research. Hell, check out the Blaze.

Ah, he said "blaze". I'm gonna go smoke now.

Tgo01

11-13-2019, 09:06 PM

I actually did end up watching CNN for most of the day, I started on Fox but switched over when Fox cut to commercial as Shifty Schiff started to talk after the opening statements. CNN showed it all commercial free with ZERO opinion segments or news reports during the breaks.

Oh spare me.

Look at this video about from CNN about Devin Nunes' opening statement:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7igV2E4rYxU

Notice the almost 20 seconds of spin from CNN before they show Nunes' opening statement?

Tgo01

11-13-2019, 09:07 PM

Oh spare me.

Look at this video about from CNN about Devin Nunes' opening statement:

Notice the almost 20 seconds of spin from CNN before they show Nunes' opening statement?

Now look at the video from CNN regarding Schitt's opening statement:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OX-57DzIvAM

So weird, no spin.

gemstonefella

11-13-2019, 09:11 PM

Ah, he said "blaze". I'm gonna go smoke now.

Something we can all agree on. Been eating it more lately though....lungs are getting old.

gemstonefella

11-13-2019, 09:13 PM

Oh spare me.

Look at this video about from CNN about Devin Nunes' opening statement:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7igV2E4rYxU

Notice the almost 20 seconds of spin from CNN before they show Nunes' opening statement?

They may have spun it afterwards, I'm sure they did, all news stations do. They had ZERO commentary or opinion going on while the actual hearing was happening. Couldn't care less what they posted afterwards.

I wonder how Nunes's lawsuit against the cow is going.

gemstonefella

11-13-2019, 09:14 PM

and I didn't have to watch any fucking commercials. UGH.

Astray

11-13-2019, 09:18 PM

Something we can all agree on. Been eating it more lately though....lungs are getting old.

I dabbed a few days ago. Never again.

Pre-made edibles or make your own butter and cook with it?

gemstonefella

11-13-2019, 09:24 PM

I dabbed a few days ago. Never again.

Pre-made edibles or make your own butter and cook with it?

After a brownie episode a couple years ago, I only go with the pre-made. 10 or 20 milligram. There's a pretty kickass root beer that I like to drink. It comes with a shot glass so you can measure. I usually have some Zoot drops with me also....two drops and a good night is had by all.

Dabs are insane. Crazy how strong the shit has gotten over the years. It's too much most of the time. A pre-rolled 1 gram joint lasts me 2 weeks if I decide to smoke.

Tgo01

11-13-2019, 09:27 PM

Astray

11-13-2019, 09:33 PM

After a brownie episode a couple years ago, I only go with the pre-made. 10 or 20 milligram. There's a pretty kickass root beer that I like to drink. It comes with a shot glass so you can measure. I usually have some Zoot drops with me also....two drops and a good night is had by all.

Dabs are insane. Crazy how strong the shit has gotten over the years. It's too much most of the time. A pre-rolled 1 gram joint lasts me 2 weeks if I decide to smoke.

Made some chicken I cooked in THC butter. Fucking delicious. Anything under 300mg is nothing, to me. I got some pre-made drink mix and it was pretty good to take to the gym. Good stuff.

I did a single dab hit and it fucking trashed me. I was laying on the floor for a little while because of how strong it was. I smoke one of those joints a day, lol. Lasts me all day. Look up Tarantula Legs. It's a joint with wax throughout, rolled in kief. Fucking great.

gemstonefella

11-13-2019, 09:42 PM

Made some chicken I cooked in THC butter. Fucking delicious. Anything under 300mg is nothing, to me. I got some pre-made drink mix and it was pretty good to take to the gym. Good stuff.

I did a single dab hit and it fucking trashed me. I was laying on the floor for a little while because of how strong it was. I smoke one of those joints a day, lol. Lasts me all day. Look up Tarantula Legs. It's a joint with wax throughout, rolled in kief. Fucking great.

Damn, I did 100 milligrams once and slept for 2 days...lol. I'll check out the T-Legs, sounds wicked.....you live in a state with legal?

Suppa Hobbit Mage

11-13-2019, 09:43 PM

I bet you guys are super successful.

gemstonefella

11-13-2019, 09:48 PM

Ambassador Taylor, the Democrats' star witness, testified that it was his understanding that the aid wouldn't be released until Ukraine stated they were going to start investigating Burisma/the Bidens, yet Ukraine never did this and the aid was released.

So we're done then right? This whole thing is complete bullshit? Or are we still pretending this is a legit impeachment inquiry?

I don't think Taylor is the star witness, I think the Dems led off with these two because of their reputations. Sondfield will probably be the guy they are hoping sticks to his "remembering" of the QPQ. Aid was released only after it because inevitable the whistleblowers report was going to be released. We do know that Zelensky scheduled a press conference and then canceled it after the aid was released.

Just on day one, will be fun to watch.

gemstonefella

11-13-2019, 09:54 PM

I bet you guys are super successful.

I do pretty well. Fuck, I sell beer for a living. In the last 12 months I've been to Vegas 4 times(super bowl trip was off the fucking chain), Reno twice, Kona, Anchorage, Chicago, NYC, Denver 3 times, San Francisco, Tahoe twice. Headed back to Vegas in a week and just booked San Antonio for the Craft Beer Conference, Anchorage for the Great Alaskan Beer and Barleywine Festival, Kona again for the new Kona Brewing brewery opening, Reno, and Chicago again. Thats just by the end of April. First class flying is the best.

Lots of people would kill to have my gig.

Astray

11-13-2019, 09:59 PM

I bet you guys are super successful.

I do well, I'm slated to go on vacation for December.

Astray

11-13-2019, 10:00 PM

Damn, I did 100 milligrams once and slept for 2 days...lol. I'll check out the T-Legs, sounds wicked.....you live in a state with legal?

Legal medically, not legal recreational us.

gemstonefella

11-13-2019, 10:10 PM

Legal medically, not legal recreational us.

Crazy living in a state where it's legal. Prices are stupid cheap. Never thought I'd see the day.

Tgo01

11-13-2019, 10:24 PM

Aid was released only after it because inevitable the whistleblowers report was going to be released.

And this is known because...?

gemstonefella

11-13-2019, 10:38 PM

And this is known because...?

Don Lemon told me.

Tgo01

11-13-2019, 10:40 PM

Don Lemon told me.

Honesty! We're finally making progress!

Seran

11-14-2019, 12:01 AM

Dreaven acts surprised whenever someone reads into timelines, like saying it's awfully coincidental that aid was not released until Democrats opened an investigation. Yet has no qualms with spinning conspiracies like Jim Jordan protecting unethical doctors. What a cook.

Do you ever stop to think why Giuliani and Sondland would spend so much time back channeling to get the Ukrainian President to announce investigations to benefit Trump re-election, only to drop it? You really don't see any tie in with Trump getting caught and reported by the whistleblower?

Tgo01

11-14-2019, 12:06 AM

Dreaven acts surprised whenever someone reads into timelines, like saying it's awfully coincidental that aid was not released until Democrats opened an investigation.

I was just wondering if someone testified about this with first hand knowledge or was this just CNN spin? Thank you for admitting it was indeed CNN spin.

Yet has no qualms with spinning conspiracies like Jim Jordan protecting unethical doctors. What a cook.

Wait what? What conspiracy theories did I engage in in regards to Jim Jordan? Do you lie so much you can't even keep this shit straight or what?

And by the way it's spelled "kook."

Seran

11-14-2019, 12:22 AM

I was just wondering if someone testified about this with first hand knowledge or was this just CNN spin? Thank you for admitting it was indeed CNN spin.

Someone at CNN must have stolen your Legos or banged your mom, because your bias against their reporting is almost on par with the President. Literally no fucks are given that you think Breitbart and Fox are the only fair news outlets, as if that weren't delusional enough. Myself and others offer informed debate as a courtesy, that you attack everyone's source is your problem.

Tgo01

11-14-2019, 12:27 AM

Someone at CNN must have stolen your Legos or banged your mom, because your bias against their reporting is almost on par with the President.

When the network literally sends a film crew to Florida to harass an old lady and accuse her of being a Russian asset because supposedly Russian trolls were on her Facebook group, literally runs segment after segment bashing children who attend a Catholic school because they wore MAGA hats, and literally employs the biggest joke of a journalist Don Lemon, then they kind of bring it upon themselves. Don't be mad at me because CNN made themselves a joke of a network in the age of Trump, blame CNN.

Literally no fucks are given that you think Breitbart and Fox are the only fair news outlets, as if that weren't delusional enough.

Never said that, nice CNN spin though. I don't think they look for "talent" here on the PC though so you can drop the schtick.

Myself and others offer informed debate as a courtesy

That is quite possibly the funniest thing you have ever said. This post deserves to be framed and put in the Smithsonian.

gemstonefella

11-14-2019, 01:05 AM

Don Lemon is pretty sad. Not sure if he or Chris Mathews is the worst of the bunch.

gemstonefella

11-14-2019, 01:08 AM

When the Wynn opened back in 05, we were checking in and I heard Chris Mathews's voice. Turned around and there he was. The longest 5 minute check-in of my life. Don't know why it grates on me so much, but it's like nails on a chalkboard. Another creeper sexual harasser.

Tgo01

11-14-2019, 01:14 AM

I can't stand to listen to Chris Matthews for more than a few seconds.

Tgo01

11-14-2019, 04:38 AM

Tgo01

11-14-2019, 04:42 AM

I've been watching some clips of this hearing, because no way in hell can I sit through hours of this stupid shit, how do Democrats think they "won" this exactly? As far as I can tell the witnesses today admitted they have no first hand knowledge of anything, at best they have second hand, third hand, and even fourth hand knowledge of certain things. One Democrat in the House even tried to defend this shit by saying that sometimes hearsay evidence is more important than direct evidence. Is this the marching orders Democrats are going with now? Hearsay evidence is better than direct knowledge of what happened? At one point both witnesses were asked what crime exactly they think Trump committed and neither could provide an answer. The one dude even admitted that it's routine for presidents to get the heads of other countries to agree to tackle corruption in their country before they receive aid.

It's okay to admit this is a shit show and that you were duped yet again into believing they finally "got" Trump. No need to sell your soul to the lowest bidder.

Let's not forget this laughable part of Ambassador fuck face's testimony, in which he agrees that Jim Jordan's description of the events is accurate:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3rmjO-W2Hm8&feature=emb_logo

Hearsay is more important than direct evidence! Especially when it's just a game of telephone!

Parkbandit

11-14-2019, 08:17 AM

I've been watching some clips of this hearing, because no way in hell can I sit through hours of this stupid shit, how do Democrats think they "won" this exactly? As far as I can tell the witnesses today admitted they have no first hand knowledge of anything, at best they have second hand, third hand, and even fourth hand knowledge of certain things. One Democrat in the House even tried to defend this shit by saying that sometimes hearsay evidence is more important than direct evidence. Is this the marching orders Democrats are going with now? Hearsay evidence is better than direct knowledge of what happened? At one point both witnesses were asked what crime exactly they think Trump committed and neither could provide an answer. The one dude even admitted that it's routine for presidents to get the heads of other countries to agree to tackle corruption in their country before they receive aid.

It's okay to admit this is a shit show and that you were duped yet again into believing they finally "got" Trump. No need to sell your soul to the lowest bidder.

It's the Kavanaugh "Hearing" and the Muller Report combined into one literal shit show.

If I didn't disagree with just about everything the New Democrat Party stood for.. I'd sorta feel bad for them at this point. Clearly 2016 was very traumatic for most of them. And while it's never appropriate to laugh at mental illness, they make it extremely difficult not to.

https://media1.giphy.com/media/9Dw95n3X406Ag/giphy.gif

Suppa Hobbit Mage

11-14-2019, 08:24 AM

They've moved to 2020 election interference, after 3 years of 2016 election interference. It's a broken record.

You could fill a house with everything they've accused Trump of that has fallen flat on its face. I can't wait til they start charging people from the Durham investigation. Fuck, I'd love to see Schitt get investigated - there should be a law for lying on the floor of the congress, repeatedly.

gemstonefella

11-14-2019, 09:46 AM

I've been watching some clips of this hearing, because no way in hell can I sit through hours of this stupid shit, how do Democrats think they "won" this exactly? As far as I can tell the witnesses today admitted they have no first hand knowledge of anything, at best they have second hand, third hand, and even fourth hand knowledge of certain things. One Democrat in the House even tried to defend this shit by saying that sometimes hearsay evidence is more important than direct evidence. Is this the marching orders Democrats are going with now? Hearsay evidence is better than direct knowledge of what happened? At one point both witnesses were asked what crime exactly they think Trump committed and neither could provide an answer. The one dude even admitted that it's routine for presidents to get the heads of other countries to agree to tackle corruption in their country before they receive aid.

It's okay to admit this is a shit show and that you were duped yet again into believing they finally "got" Trump. No need to sell your soul to the lowest bidder.

I watched it all. They didn't "not come up with a crime", they refused to answer one way or the other. They did it multiple times, continually reminding both sides they were there to share their knowledge of things that happened, not to make judgements on the guilt or non-guilt of the president.

They both agreed it wasn't proper that Trump held up the aid but refused to say if it was impeachable or not. They also both made it very clear, multiple times, that there was a difference between Biden doing it to forward an actual foreign policy and Trump doing it to benefit his re-election campaign.

I do agree that we need to hear from people with direct knowledge of what happened. IF the White House would just "allow" them to respond to a legally issued subpoena or the DoJ would release the documents that have been requested by Congress, we would hear from them.

Back

11-14-2019, 10:11 AM

Methais

11-14-2019, 11:04 AM

Methais

11-14-2019, 11:19 AM

gemstonefella

11-14-2019, 11:23 AM

Fuck that, I think I'd rather try the Paqui Reaper challenge.

Astray

11-14-2019, 11:24 AM

Your slow realization that impeachment is going nowhere is great. The buildup will just make the inevitable meltdown that much better.

Just wait for the inevitable wall of N bombs.

https://youtu.be/TEC-bPI_nRA

Okay but is he dead?

audioserf

11-14-2019, 11:24 AM

Dabs are wild because someone had to go 'what if weed, but crystal meth?' to invent them

Methais

11-14-2019, 11:31 AM

Suppa Hobbit Mage

11-14-2019, 11:41 AM

Parkbandit

11-14-2019, 02:21 PM

Everyone should watch the first day. It really paints the big picture.

Sadly, innocent Ukrainians are caught up in this president's politics. Remember, and if you watch the hearing you'll be informed, that Russia broke all kinds of treaties and agreements by invading Ukraine and annexing Crimea back in 2014., Russia and Ukraine are still fighting over this. America is, or was, a huge supporter of a democratic Ukraine against Russian influence. America's aid is a huge help in their fight against Russia. Our current president withheld that important aid that the Ukrainians need to fight off an illegal act by Russia in an effort to attack the children of a political rival.

This president has no concern for Ukraine, no concern for America, and no concern for anything other than himself.

Watch the hearings. The witnesses so far are convincing with their genuine testimony. The republicans not only literally look like crooked villains, they are acting like children throwing tantrums because mommy wouldn't let them have a piece of candy.

You remind us every time you post.. you are the champion for a reason.

Thank you.

Seran

11-14-2019, 03:31 PM

I watched it all. They didn't "not come up with a crime", they refused to answer one way or the other. They did it multiple times, continually reminding both sides they were there to share their knowledge of things that happened, not to make judgements on the guilt or non-guilt of the president.

They both agreed it wasn't proper that Trump held up the aid but refused to say if it was impeachable or not. They also both made it very clear, multiple times, that there was a difference between Biden doing it to forward an actual foreign policy and Trump doing it to benefit his re-election campaign.

I do agree that we need to hear from people with direct knowledge of what happened. IF the White House would just "allow" them to respond to a legally issued subpoena or the DoJ would release the documents that have been requested by Congress, we would hear from them.

I was pretty impressed with their attempts to be non-partisan and to provide facts only to the questions offered. Ambassador Taylor in particular did a great job being up front in saying that he wasn't there to speculate on state of mind, but rather the facts as he knew them.

Methais

11-14-2019, 03:55 PM

Tgo01

11-14-2019, 04:55 PM

Everyone should watch the first day. It really paints the big picture.

Sadly, innocent Ukrainians are caught up in this president's politics. Remember, and if you watch the hearing you'll be informed, that Russia broke all kinds of treaties and agreements by invading Ukraine and annexing Crimea back in 2014., Russia and Ukraine are still fighting over this. America is, or was, a huge supporter of a democratic Ukraine against Russian influence. America's aid is a huge help in their fight against Russia. Our current president withheld that important aid that the Ukrainians need to fight off an illegal act by Russia in an effort to attack the children of a political rival.

This president has no concern for Ukraine, no concern for America, and no concern for anything other than himself.

Watch the hearings. The witnesses so far are convincing with their genuine testimony. The republicans not only literally look like crooked villains, they are acting like children throwing tantrums because mommy wouldn't let them have a piece of candy.

Did you miss the part where both witnesses admitted Trump has helped Ukraine more than Obama has? Of course you did because it goes against your narrative. I guess you also missed the part where both witnesses admitted the aid was released with no required action on Ukraine’s part. You must have also missed the part where the one guy said it was routine for presidents to get the country receiving aid to agree to tackle their corruption problems, because of course it is, why would we continue giving monies to a country that had a corruption problem.

Tgo01

11-14-2019, 04:56 PM

M
I watched it all. They didn't "not come up with a crime", they refused to answer one way or the other. They did it multiple times, continually reminding both sides they were there to share their knowledge of things that happened, not to make judgements on the guilt or non-guilt of the president.

They both agreed it wasn't proper that Trump held up the aid but refused to say if it was impeachable or not. They also both made it very clear, multiple times, that there was a difference between Biden doing it to forward an actual foreign policy and Trump doing it to benefit his re-election campaign.

I do agree that we need to hear from people with direct knowledge of what happened. IF the White House would just "allow" them to respond to a legally issued subpoena or the DoJ would release the documents that have been requested by Congress, we would hear from them.

That’s bullshit reasoning. For a couple of guys who have an opinion on literally everything the idea that they don’t have an opinion on which crime Trump may have committed doesn’t fly.

Tgo01

11-14-2019, 04:58 PM

I was pretty impressed with their attempts to be non-partisan and to provide facts only to the questions offered. Ambassador Taylor in particular did a great job being up front in saying that he wasn't there to speculate on state of mind, but rather the facts as he knew them.

Ambassador Taylor said he wasn’t there to speculate on state of mind? Holy shit, this thing is even more of a shit show than I thought.

Alfster

11-14-2019, 04:59 PM

Alfster

11-14-2019, 05:01 PM

Tgo01

11-14-2019, 05:05 PM

So that's where you moved the goal posts to. Got it. It didn't work out, so who cares they tried.

I'm more concerned about using private citizens without security clearances to conduct their official? Business.

You had a boner for Hillary's emails, but a whole lot of people are over hearing conversations between Trump and sondland on private cell phones...do you care about national security?

Wait wait wait, I’m the one moving goal posts? All we have heard this entire time is Trump withheld aid until he got something in return and on the very first day of public hearings on this shit show both witnesses said the aid was released with no required action on Ukraine’s part and you still believe Trump should be impeached but I’M the one moving the goalposts? Okay, guy.

Back

11-14-2019, 05:20 PM

Did you miss the part where both witnesses admitted Trump has helped Ukraine more than Obama has? Of course you did because it goes against your narrative. I guess you also missed the part where both witnesses admitted the aid was released with no required action on Ukraine’s part. You must have also missed the part where the one guy said it was routine for presidents to get the country receiving aid to agree to tackle their corruption problems, because of course it is, why would we continue giving monies to a country that had a corruption problem.

What was in the aid is not in question. That the aid was released is not in question.

What is in question is that this president of the US withheld aid to another country to pressure that country to investigate a US citizen who happens to be the child of his biggest political opponent in the next election when this president had the entire US intelligence agencies at his disposal.

Tgo01

11-14-2019, 05:30 PM

What was in the aid is not in question. That the aid was released is not in question.

What is in question is that this president of the US withheld aid to another country to pressure that country to investigate a US citizen who happens to be the child of his biggest political opponent in the next election when this president had the entire US intelligence agencies at his disposal.

Both witnesses yesterday said the aid was released with no required action on Ukraine’s part. So we are done right? No wrong doing? It is this where you too move the goal posts while accusing me of moving the goal posts?

Back

11-14-2019, 05:37 PM

Both witnesses yesterday said the aid was released with no required action on Ukraine’s part. So we are done right? No wrong doing? It is this where you too move the goal posts while accusing me of moving the goal posts?

Not at all. The blackmail occurred. Sending aid after you think you are going to get caught does not absolve anyone. You can't steal a car then give it back when they catch you and walk away.

Methais

11-14-2019, 05:39 PM

Not at all. The blackmail occurred. Sending aid after you think you are going to get caught does not absolve anyone. You can't steal a car then give it back when they catch you and walk away.

Now it’s blackmail? :lol:

What’s your definition of blackmail?

gemstonefella

11-14-2019, 05:47 PM

It's starting to sound like a lot of:

https://i.imgur.com/8JrHJ7f.gif

If the impeachment is unsuccessful they should remove all persons from office responsible for its attempt simply for wasting time and resources.

Did you feel the same about the 10 Benghazi Investigations/33 hearings?

gemstonefella

11-14-2019, 05:52 PM

Did you miss the part where both witnesses admitted Trump has helped Ukraine more than Obama has? Of course you did because it goes against your narrative. I guess you also missed the part where both witnesses admitted the aid was released with no required action on Ukraine’s part. You must have also missed the part where the one guy said it was routine for presidents to get the country receiving aid to agree to tackle their corruption problems, because of course it is, why would we continue giving monies to a country that had a corruption problem.

I didn't agree with Obama's foreign policy much but the excuse was that it was a pro-Russian corrupt government in Ukraine and the Javelin technology would have ended up in Russian hands. Take it for what it's worth.

Agreed on the corruption/money part though it would have been nice if Trump mentioned corrupt government as a reason instead of only the Bidens on the phone call. Not to mention calling for China to investigate them as well.

Suppa Hobbit Mage

11-14-2019, 05:52 PM

Now it’s blackmail? :lol:

What’s your definition of blackmail?

pretty sure ‘black’mail is racist. Therefor, Backrash is racist. And a pedophile.

gemstonefella

11-14-2019, 05:53 PM

M

That’s bullshit reasoning. For a couple of guys who have an opinion on literally everything the idea that they don’t have an opinion on which crime Trump may have committed doesn’t fly.

If you watched it then you saw they didn't have an opinion on everything.

gemstonefella

11-14-2019, 05:56 PM

So that's where you moved the goal posts to. Got it. It didn't work out, so who cares they tried.

I'm more concerned about using private citizens without security clearances to conduct their official? Business.

You had a boner for Hillary's emails, but a whole lot of people are over hearing conversations between Trump and sondland on private cell phones...do you care about national security?

What he said. They don't give a shit about anything if Trump does it. It's a cult. He's a rank amateur who has no business in politics. He should go back to fucking over contractors, committing fraud with his charities and "universities", and running companies into bankruptcy. Shit he knows how to do. Hell, go grab some ladies by the pussy and imagine dating his daughter while he's at it.

Tgo01

11-14-2019, 05:57 PM

Not at all. The blackmail occurred. Sending aid after you think you are going to get caught does not absolve anyone. You can't steal a car then give it back when they catch you and walk away.

Quid Pro Quo LITERALLY requires, you know, a quid pro quo.

Suppa Hobbit Mage

11-14-2019, 05:58 PM

I don’t excuse trump for anything. He’s just better than everyone else. Until that changes, he’s got my vote.

Tgo01

11-14-2019, 05:58 PM

Agreed on the corruption/money part though it would have been nice if Trump mentioned corrupt government as a reason instead of only the Bidens on the phone call.

That's exactly what Trump mentioned on the call, he wanted Ukraine to do more about corruption in their country.

gemstonefella

11-14-2019, 06:00 PM

How'd you "conservatives" like that 134 billion deficit in October?

gemstonefella

11-14-2019, 06:01 PM

That's exactly what Trump mentioned on the call, he wanted Ukraine to do more about corruption in their country.

How do you know? The official transcript has never been released. According to Vindman, there are plenty of missing parts...I believe you would call them ellipses.

Tgo01

11-14-2019, 06:01 PM

What he said. They don't give a shit about anything if Trump does it.

That's weird coming from someone who seems to only give a shit about something because Trump did it.

gemstonefella

11-14-2019, 06:03 PM

I don’t excuse trump for anything. He’s just better than everyone else. Until that changes, he’s got my vote.

There you go again, talking in absolutes. You have no imperative proof to back up that statement. God damn Ted Cruz would have made a better president and if Kasich was the guy, the country would be humming along smoothly.

Tgo01

11-14-2019, 06:03 PM

How'd you "conservatives" like that 134 billion deficit in October?

I love it! Wish we could spend more! More! MORE!

How do you know? The official transcript has never been released. According to Vindman, there are plenty of missing parts...I believe you would call them ellipses.

The official transcript has been released. Vindman said while he thinks some words may have been omitted he thinks this was on the part of the person transcribing the call and doesn't think there was any malicious intent behind it. Vindman also testified that he thinks the transcript that has been released is largely accurate and anything missing from the transcript is insignificant and wouldn't change the overall call.

Tgo01

11-14-2019, 06:04 PM

There you go again, talking in absolutes. You have no imperative proof to back up that statement. God damn Ted Cruz would have made a better president and if Kasich was the guy, the country would be humming along smoothly.

I think you're talking to a bunch of people who didn't want Trump as their first pick. I wanted Ben Carson, I'm pretty sure Gelston wanted Carson also.

But for me at least I think Trump has surprised me and has done a great job compared to what I thought he would do. I thought he would cave into Democrats' bullshit demands on just about every issue and just turn into another Bush Jr.

gemstonefella

11-14-2019, 06:06 PM

That's weird coming from someone who seems to only give a shit about something because Trump did it.

I would care about any US president's actions that used the power of his office to further his own agenda over the good of the country. I also can't stand that he has to lie about everything.

Even though I hated his business dealings and the facade he puts forth, I was willing to give him a chance. I wanted to try a businessman at the helm, it's why I voted for Perot in 92. He's an abject failure.

Suppa Hobbit Mage

11-14-2019, 06:09 PM

gemstonefella

11-14-2019, 06:10 PM

I love it! Wish we could spend more! More! MORE!

The official transcript has been released. Vindman said while he thinks some words may have been omitted he thinks this was on the part of the person transcribing the call and doesn't think there was any malicious intent behind it. Vindman also testified that he thinks the transcript that has been released is largely accurate and anything missing from the transcript is insignificant and wouldn't change the overall call.

I have no doubt you were screaming about Obama's spending from 08-12. I know I was. I wanted to let everything fail.

We'll see what Vindman says next week in his open testimony. I think we got two different things out of what's been released so far.

gemstonefella

11-14-2019, 06:10 PM

kasich was against gay marriage. I’m not down with that. I’d have got d for Cruz.

Not down with it either, but it's far down my list of qualifications. It would basically be out of his hands anyway.

Suppa Hobbit Mage

11-14-2019, 06:11 PM

Dude the deficit has me for real freaked out.

gemstonefella

11-14-2019, 06:12 PM

Dude the deficit has me for real freaked out.

It's fucking insane. One of these days the butcher bill will come due. Hope I'm gone by then.

Tgo01

11-14-2019, 06:13 PM

I would care about any US president's actions that used the power of his office to further his own agenda over the good of the country. I also can't stand that he has to lie about everything.

Even though I hated his business dealings and the facade he puts forth, I was willing to give him a chance. I wanted to try a businessman at the helm, it's why I voted for Perot in 92. He's an abject failure.

How is Trump an abject failure again? Because of this Ukraine and Russian nonsense?

Suppa Hobbit Mage

11-14-2019, 06:13 PM

I mean this sincerely. I think most of us want the same things. The 2 party system just doesn’t support it, and our candidates are NOT the best thing his country has to offer.

Tgo01

11-14-2019, 06:14 PM

We'll see what Vindman says next week in his open testimony. I think we got two different things out of what's been released so far.

No this was from the transcript that was released of Vindman's testimony. You might be relying on the leaks Schiff released to the media before the transcripts were released.

Tgo01

11-14-2019, 06:18 PM

It's fucking insane. One of these days the butcher bill will come due. Hope I'm gone by then.

Like I said during Obama's time in office, a managed debt is fine. As long as the economy is growing to compensate for our borrowing then it's fine. The problem was under Obama our spending was increasing by a lot while our GDP was only growing modestly at best. Now the economy is growing so much under Trump that our debt/GDP ratio is expected to stay the same through 2021 even though our spending has increased, unless one of the socialists get into office and completely fucks our economy.

gemstonefella

11-14-2019, 06:25 PM

How is Trump an abject failure again? Because of this Ukraine and Russian nonsense?

His accomplishments are things I don't really give two shits about. Jerusalem as the capitol of Israel? Fuck off, who cares.
De-Regulation.....I'm good with a lot of it. I don't trust banks though. They will never work in our best interest.
Tax breaks for his billionaire buddies? Awesome, see my last post about the debt. There was zero reason to cook the books while the economy was already booming.
My 401k was already rocketing up under Obama and to be honest, Ive invested in stuff other than the volatile stock/bonds markets. I've read the history of 1929 and lived through 2008. No way I make those mistakes. Yes, I invest some money in the market, but I have a shit ton of gold and art.
He's shit all over our allies. Say what you want about "countries paying their fair share", but we've been using these countries for their strategic locations for a long time now. A stable Europe is good for us.
Was happy with his war on Isis, and agreed that it is time to bring all our guys home(I live near one of the biggest military bases in the country and have a ton of friends deployed), but then he fucks over our allies again(kurds), and allegedly yanks our troops out but then we just find out he's leaving them there to steal....er guard oil, or moving them to be a mercenary force for Saudi Arabia.

I could go on and on but it's not worth the time it's taken to write this out.

gemstonefella

11-14-2019, 06:26 PM

No this was from the transcript that was released of Vindman's testimony. You might be relying on the leaks Schiff released to the media before the transcripts were released.

I was talking about the "transcript" that the Trump team themselves released.

Tgo01

11-14-2019, 06:33 PM

His accomplishments are things I don't really give two shits about. Jerusalem as the capitol of Israel? Fuck off, who cares.
De-Regulation.....I'm good with a lot of it. I don't trust banks though. They will never work in our best interest.
Tax breaks for his billionaire buddies? Awesome, see my last post about the debt. There was zero reason to cook the books while the economy was already booming.
My 401k was already rocketing up under Obama and to be honest, Ive invested in stuff other than the volatile stock/bonds markets. I've read the history of 1929 and lived through 2008. No way I make those mistakes. Yes, I invest some money in the market, but I have a shit ton of gold and art.
He's shit all over our allies. Say what you want about "countries paying their fair share", but we've been using these countries for their strategic locations for a long time now. A stable Europe is good for us.
Was happy with his war on Isis, and agreed that it is time to bring all our guys home(I live near one of the biggest military bases in the country and have a ton of friends deployed), but then he fucks over our allies again(kurds), and allegedly yanks our troops out but then we just find out he's leaving them there to steal....er guard oil, or moving them to be a mercenary force for Saudi Arabia.

I could go on and on but it's not worth the time it's taken to write this out.

I guess you don't care that the Kurdish commander personally thanked Trump for the cease fire he brokered between Turkey and the Kurds/Syria?

Trump has followed through on his promise to secure the border, surely that's gotta count for something.

The tax cuts ended up helping a lot of people that weren't Trump's billionaire buddies.

I don't understand how you can just hand wave away the booming economy, not to mention the median household income has grown much faster under Trump than under both Obama and Bush Jr.

Record low unemployment for blacks and Hispanics, increased wages for every ethnic group, got us out of the absurd Paris agreement, we are pumping out so much oil that we are energy independent for the first time since...well a long time. But Trump tells our allies to fulfill their promises to NATO to spend more on their military to counter Russian aggression so I guess none of that matters and Trump is still somehow a Russian asset.

gemstonefella

11-14-2019, 06:33 PM

Like I said during Obama's time in office, a managed debt is fine. As long as the economy is growing to compensate for our borrowing then it's fine. The problem was under Obama our spending was increasing by a lot while our GDP was only growing modestly at best. Now the economy is growing so much under Trump that our debt/GDP ratio is expected to stay the same through 2021 even though our spending has increased, unless one of the socialists get into office and completely fucks our economy.

GDP has basically been the same since 2011 with some outliers hitting here and there. I believe 3rd quarter GDP was 1.9% and 2nd quarter was 2.0?

gemstonefella

11-14-2019, 06:47 PM

I guess you don't care that the Kurdish commander personally thanked Trump for the cease fire he brokered between Turkey and the Kurds/Syria?

Trump has followed through on his promise to secure the border, surely that's gotta count for something.

The tax cuts ended up helping a lot of people that weren't Trump's billionaire buddies.

I don't understand how you can just hand wave away the booming economy, not to mention the median household income has grown much faster under Trump than under both Obama and Bush Jr.

Record low unemployment for blacks and Hispanics, increased wages for every ethnic group, got us out of the absurd Paris agreement, we are pumping out so much oil that we are energy independent for the first time since...well a long time. But Trump tells our allies to fulfill their promises to NATO to spend more on their military to counter Russian aggression so I guess none of that matters and Trump is still somehow a Russian asset.

The economy, for me, has been booming since 2009. I've had 10 nice years of making a very comfortable living.

How much credit do you give Obama for where we've gone? Any?

gemstonefella

11-14-2019, 06:48 PM

I don't feel that is a situation to make light of, but is a good example of sheer colossal waste all around. Should people be removed from office over it? Absolutely yes.

https://media1.tenor.com/images/778141d7b65acdada18291d03802f027/tenor.gif?itemid=14778595

That's fair.

Tgo01

11-14-2019, 07:00 PM

I was talking about the "transcript" that the Trump team themselves released.

Yes, you also said Vindman said it was inaccurate and that a lot of information was missing where those ellipses are, yet Vindman himself testified that the transcript was mostly accurate and he even relied on the released transcript during his testimony.

Here is directly from Vindman's testimony:

Q: Is there a word-for-word transcript that is produced of these conversations?
A: I don't believe so.
Q: Okay. So this is usual?
A: Yes, completely normal.

Here are the couple of edits Vindman suggested be in the transcript that were not:

A: Yeah. So page four, bottom of first paragraph, let's see, okay, so that ellipses where it ends with "it,", there was a comment about there are recordings from the President. He said that "there are recordings" of these misdeeds.
Q: Okay. And that ellipses substitues for there are recordings?
A: Correct.
Q: Okay. Was there anything else that was different?
A: There's one other substantive item in the next paragraph from Zelensky, where it says, "He or she will look into the situation specifically to the company" -- it shouldn't be "the company." It should be "to Burisma that you mentioned."

Q: Is there anything else that you recall as being substantively different?
A: Substantively, I think those are the only two items.

Q: But generally speaking, when there are ellipses here, do they replace words?
A: Not always. Like I said, in my notes, if it was a Ukrainian word or something that required some content and it was not in there, I'd replace it, but not every ellipses has something else with it.

And I can't find it now in Vindman's testimony and I'm too lazy to keep looking so take my word for it or not, but Vindman said he didn't think there was any malicious intent in not including his proposed edits.

Tgo01

11-14-2019, 07:04 PM

GDP has basically been the same since 2011 with some outliers hitting here and there.

You're kidding right? The GDP has grown about 25% since 2011.

Tgo01

11-14-2019, 07:05 PM

The economy, for me, has been booming since 2009. I've had 10 nice years of making a very comfortable living.

How much credit do you give Obama for where we've gone? Any?

I sure as shit ain't giving Obama credit for Trump's economy.

gemstonefella

11-14-2019, 07:33 PM

We'll see what happens during his open testimony.

gemstonefella

11-14-2019, 07:34 PM

You're kidding right? The GDP has grown about 25% since 2011.

I'm talking by quarter.

Tgo01

11-14-2019, 07:36 PM

I'm talking by quarter.

Do you mean the increases has been about the same since 2011, or the total GDP?

Tgo01

11-14-2019, 07:36 PM

We'll see what happens during his open testimony.

Suddenly his testimony behind closed doors isn't good enough? It seemed good enough for you when you thought Vindman said the transcript was inaccurate.

gemstonefella

11-14-2019, 07:45 PM

Tgo01

11-14-2019, 07:49 PM

I'm saying we've seen the effect of the Trump tax cuts boosting GDP start to dwindle back down to Obama level GDP gains. I might be mis-remembering but I seem to remember a couple of 5.0% gains during the Obama years. Trump is rocking right under 3 while Obama was right above 2. It jumps all over the board from quarter to quarter.

Obama averaged 1.58% GDP growth during his 8 years in office, so far Trump is averaging 2.65% GDP growth and will probably be even higher after 2019 is finished because this has been a good year as well.

Also my earlier point about GDP growth wasn't just in terms of percent but in total value. A 2.5% growth on 1 trillion dollars isn't going to be as much as a 2.5% growth on 2 trillion dollars, for example.

gemstonefella

11-14-2019, 07:57 PM

Obama averaged 1.58% GDP growth during his 8 years in office, so far Trump is averaging 2.65% GDP growth and will probably be even higher after 2019 is finished because this has been a good year as well.

Also my earlier point about GDP growth wasn't just in terms of percent but in total value. A 2.5% growth on 1 trillion dollars isn't going to be as much as a 2.5% growth on 2 trillion dollars, for example.

Where do you get the 1.58 number from? And Trump is averaging better than that.

gemstonefella

11-14-2019, 08:02 PM

In more important things:

Do I roll with John Brown or Christian Kirk this week?

Tgo01

11-14-2019, 08:03 PM

Where do you get the 1.58 number from? And Trump is averaging better than that.

2009 -2.5
2010 2.6
2011 1.6
2012 2.2
3012 1.8
2014 2.5
2015 2.9
2016 1.6

Maybe the site I am looking at has the wrong values.

Alfster

11-14-2019, 08:11 PM

Wait wait wait, I’m the one moving goal posts? All we have heard this entire time is Trump withheld aid until he got something in return and on the very first day of public hearings on this shit show both witnesses said the aid was released with no required action on Ukraine’s part and you still believe Trump should be impeached but I’M the one moving the goalposts? Okay, guy.

Again. Ignoring the actual point.

I'm not sure that I care about withholding aid. Do you think it's appropriate to have private citizens running a back channel that goes against official U.S. policy? Especially since those citizens do not have security access?

You cared about Hillary's emails because your party told you to. You ignore Ivanka, kushner, and others using private emails for official business because....they told you it's not a big deal. You're willing to act like it's not a big deal that the president is overheard conducting business with regards to Ukraine in the open in front of aids.

He's a walking national security nightmare. But you're stuck on one point, quid quo pro. That's not even the big deal out of all of this.

Tgo01

11-14-2019, 08:20 PM

I'm not sure that I care about withholding aid.

And I'm the one moving the goalposts. Right.

Do you think it's appropriate to have private citizens running a back channel that goes against official U.S. policy? Especially since those citizens do not have security access?

Wait so this is suddenly what Democrats and Never Trumpers are concerned with? And I'm the one moving the goalposts. Right.

You cared about Hillary's emails because your party told you to.

I cared about Hillary's emails because she was ordered to turn over her server and instead bleached it and literally smashed phones with hammers to ensure no one could ever have access to her emails. THAT doesn't concern you? Or does it not concern you because "your party" told you it shouldn't concern you?

But you're stuck on one point, quid quo pro. That's not even the big deal out of all of this.

That's LITERALLY what Democrats have been screaming about this entire time. And just like when the Russia bullshit started to fall apart Democrats are now moving the goalposts and insisting the "real crime" is something else entirely, and just like with the Russian bullshit you guys are here gaslighting the ever living shit out of everyone to insist it has always been about something else. If I created a montage of the number of times Democrats mentioned "quid pro quo" or "digging up dirt" it would probably be about an hour long made up of just 15 second sound bytes. But now suddenly that's "not even the big deal out of all of this."

gemstonefella

11-14-2019, 08:23 PM

2009 -2.5
2010 2.6
2011 1.6
2012 2.2
3012 1.8
2014 2.5
2015 2.9
2016 1.6

Maybe the site I am looking at has the wrong values.

One of us is. Looks like I'm looking at "real" GDP and you're looking at GDP. Real GDP gives them both higher numbers. but seems to be the measure most fiduciary based sites use.

Fuck if I know which is the better measure.

Tgo01

11-14-2019, 08:27 PM

One of us is. Looks like I'm looking at "real" GDP and you're looking at GDP. Real GDP gives them both higher numbers. but seems to be the measure most fiduciary based sites use.

Nominal GDP is typically used when looking at GDP/debt ratio, which was the point I was making earlier.

Tgo01

11-14-2019, 08:31 PM

Fuck if I know which is the better measure.

Real GDP is typically the better measure for most everything because it takes inflation into account so if we had a year with 20% inflation then of course the GDP would go up but people's purchasing power wouldn't necessarily be higher.

Nominal GDP is used when comparing the GDP/debt ratio because the nominal GDP rate and the debt both don't take inflation into account.

gemstonefella

11-14-2019, 08:31 PM

And I'm the one moving the goalposts. Right.

Wait so this is suddenly what Democrats and Never Trumpers are concerned with? And I'm the one moving the goalposts. Right.

I cared about Hillary's emails because she was ordered to turn over her server and instead bleached it and literally smashed phones with hammers to ensure no one could ever have access to her emails. THAT doesn't concern you? Or does it not concern you because "your party" told you it shouldn't concern you?

That's LITERALLY what Democrats have been screaming about this entire time. And just like when the Russia bullshit started to fall apart Democrats are now moving the goalposts and insisting the "real crime" is something else entirely, and just like with the Russian bullshit you guys are here gaslighting the ever living shit out of everyone to insist it has always been about something else. If I created a montage of the number of times Democrats mentioned "quid pro quo" or "digging up dirt" it would probably be about an hour long made up of just 15 second sound bytes. But now suddenly that's "not even the big deal out of all of this."

Are you concerned about all the people that Trump has ordered not to testify even with legally issued subpoenas? About refusing to an in-person interview with Mueller? That Kushner and Co. uses encrypted apps to communicate with people during the whole "russia thing" and then refused to cooperate or turn over the communications.

I don't want to rehash Mueller whatsoever, but it was in the report that destruction of evidence or refusal to turn over encrypted messages played a role in the outcome.

It still kills me that people think the Mueller report exonerated Trump, it's said right in the report it doesn't.

gemstonefella

11-14-2019, 08:35 PM

Real GDP is typically the better measure for most everything because it takes inflation into account so if we had a year with 20% inflation then of course the GDP would go up but people's purchasing power wouldn't necessarily be higher.

Nominal GDP is used when comparing the GDP/debt ratio because the nominal GDP rate and the debt both don't take inflation into account.

Gotcha. 2009 was a weird year for me. A lot of people I knew were losing their houses. We were finally in the position to buy. Was hard to be happy about it while almost everyone else was suffering. It definitely has an effect when you average out Obama's numbers.

Tgo01

11-14-2019, 08:36 PM

Are you concerned about all the people that Trump has ordered not to testify even with legally issued subpoenas?

No because this isn't a real impeachment inquiry with bogus bullshit rules. Trump isn't even allowed to have a lawyer there like all other impeachments have allowed for. It's a sideshow, I don't blame the president for not wanting to participate in a sideshow.

About refusing to an in-person interview with Mueller?

No, like I said the other day the accused in this country don't have to testify against themselves.

I don't want to rehash Mueller whatsoever, but it was in the report that destruction of evidence or refusal to turn over encrypted messages played a role in the outcome.

Played a role in which outcome?

It still kills me that people think the Mueller report exonerated Trump, it's said right in the report it doesn't.

Mueller himself testified that they found no wrongdoing on Trump's part or on the part of anyone working for Trump in regards to the whole Russia bullshit.

The only thing Mueller didn't decide on was whether or not Trump committed obstruction of justice, after which the DOJ said Trump did not commit obstruction of justice. Mueller did say the report did not exonerate Trump in regards to obstruction of justice, but that isn't the job of a prosecutor. A prosecutor almost never exonerates someone of a crime, rather they gather the evidence and decide if they have enough evidence to charge someone with a crime and the fact that Mueller chose not to charge Trump with a crime kind of points to there not being enough evidence to charge Trump with obstruction of justice.

Tgo01

11-14-2019, 08:39 PM

Gotcha. 2009 was a weird year for me. A lot of people I knew were losing their houses. We were finally in the position to buy. Was hard to be happy about it while almost everyone else was suffering. It definitely has an effect when you average out Obama's numbers.

I'm not going to deny Obama wasn't given a shitty economy when he took over, but he also didn't really help things nor did he seem to want to help things. In fact at one point he even said low economic growth was "the new normal" for the US. The stock market has a lot to do with speculation, when the president of the largest economy is shrugging his shoulders and saying "Get used to a shit economy" it tends have a bad effect on the stock market. When you have a president who is like "I'm gonna bring jobs back and lower the unemployment and make it easier to do business in the US and bring investments back" then that tends to help the stock market and thus the economy, especially when that president actually follows through with those promises.

gemstonefella

11-14-2019, 08:43 PM

No because this isn't a real impeachment inquiry with bogus bullshit rules. Trump isn't even allowed to have a lawyer there like all other impeachments have allowed for. It's a sideshow, I don't blame the president for not wanting to participate in a sideshow.

No, like I said the other day the accused in this country don't have to testify against themselves.

Played a role in which outcome?

Mueller himself testified that they found no wrongdoing on Trump's part or on the part of anyone working for Trump in regards to the whole Russian bullshit.

The only thing Mueller didn't decide on was whether or not Trump committed obstruction of justice, in which the DOJ said Trump did not commit obstruction of justice. Mueller did say the report did not exonerate Trump in regards to obstruction of justice, but that isn't the job of a prosecutor. A prosecutor almost never exonerates someone of a crime, rather they gather the evidence and decide if they have enough evidence to charge someone with a crime and the fact that Mueller chose not to charge Trump with a crime kind of points to there not being enough evidence to charge Trump with obstruction of justice.

Those are very Trumpy colored glasses. There was never a chance he was going to charge Trump with conspiracy. He says it right off the bat in the report. I'll leave it at that.

Trump owes a lot to Barr. I'll leave that at that also.

Tgo01

11-14-2019, 08:46 PM

Those are very Trumpy colored glasses.

I would say all of the same even if this were Obama. But Republicans never turned the House into a circus like this in regards to Obama.

There was never a chance he was going to charge Trump with conspiracy. He says it right off the bat in the report. I'll leave it at that.

What are you talking about? He said no such thing.

gemstonefella

11-14-2019, 08:47 PM

I'm not going to deny Obama wasn't given a shitty economy when he took over, but he also didn't really help things nor did he seem to want to help things. In fact at one point he even said low economic growth was "the new normal" for the US. The stock market has a lot to do with speculation, when the president of the largest economy is shrugging his shoulders and saying "Get used to a shit economy" it tends have a bad effect on the stock market. When you have a president who is like "I'm gonna bring jobs back and lower the unemployment and make it easier to do business in the US and bring investments back" then that tends to help the stock market and thus the economy, especially when that president actually follows through with those promises.

Didn't the stock market have a top 5 number in largest percentage growth by president under Obama? Pretty sure he added 16 million jobs also......only 2 million more than Ivanka.....but not bad.

gemstonefella

11-14-2019, 08:50 PM

I would say all of the same even if this were Obama. But Republicans never turned the House into a circus like this in regards to Obama.

What are you talking about? He said no such thing.

Benghazi? Dudes yelling you lie during SOTU?

He said, charging the president with a crime was not an option...actually might have been at his press conference.

gemstonefella

11-14-2019, 08:51 PM

Wasn't it Mark Meadows who aid send Obama home to kenya?

Tgo01

11-14-2019, 08:54 PM

Benghazi? Dudes yelling you lie during SOTU?

Oh no! Someone said you lie! Give me a break.

And what about Benghazi? The House runs endless investigations all the time, those don't all turn into bullshit impeachment "inquires." This is 1000% more serious than the dumb Benghazi hearings. As useless as Obama was for 8 years I never thought he should be impeached for anything, and I'm glad the Republicans didn't embarrass themselves pursuing impeachment based on nothing.

He said, charging the president with a crime was not an option...actually might have been at his press conference.

This is false. He even testified before congressthat the memo at the DOJ about charging a sitting president with a crime had nothing to do with his decision on whether or not to charge Trump with obstruction of justice.

gemstonefella

11-14-2019, 09:02 PM

Oh no! Someone said you lie! Give me a break.

And what about Benghazi? The House runs endless investigations all the time, those don't all turn into bullshit impeachment "inquires." This is 1000% more serious than the dumb Benghazi hearings. As useless as Obama was for 8 years I never thought he should be impeached for anything, and I'm glad the Republicans didn't embarrass themselves pursuing impeachment based on nothing.

This is false. He even testified before congressthat the memo at the DOJ about charging a sitting president with a crime had nothing to do with his decision on whether or not to charge Trump with obstruction of justice.

https://www.cnbc.com/video/2019/05/29/robert-mueller-press-conference-on-russia-investigation.html

Am I hearing things at 4:40 here?

Tgo01

11-14-2019, 09:08 PM

https://www.cnbc.com/video/2019/05/29/robert-mueller-press-conference-on-russia-investigation.html

Am I hearing things at 4:40 here?

And here is what Mueller said during his testimony before congress, the important part starts at around 25 seconds in:

https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2019/07/24/robert-mueller-clarifies-olc-answer-rep-ted-lieu-house-intelligence-committee-crn-vpx.cnn

gemstonefella

11-14-2019, 09:09 PM

Are you really linking CNN? Wow!

You realize it says right next to the video: Mueller said they made no assessment as to whether there was a crime or not because of the OLC guidance.
Source: CNN

gemstonefella

11-14-2019, 09:16 PM

And here is what Mueller said during his testimony before congress, the important part starts at around 25 seconds in:

https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2019/07/24/robert-mueller-clarifies-olc-answer-rep-ted-lieu-house-intelligence-committee-crn-vpx.cnn

He says it's not the right way to say it and still leaves it pretty ambiguous as to his meaning.

What did he say in the video I linked?

Tgo01

11-14-2019, 09:16 PM

Are you really linking CNN? Wow!

I'm linking to a video, I was too lazy to find the video on YouTube.

You realize it says right next to the video: Mueller said they made no assessment as to whether there was a crime or not because of the OLC guidance.
Source: CNN

Good point, I really should be careful to never link to CNN for anything since they love to spin everything. To be fair to CNN in this particular instance though I'm not sure if they are saying that was Mueller's original testimony, because as he said in this clip he is clarifying his previous statement, or if CNN are such propagandists that they have to editorialize a video that everyone can watch.

Regardless just watch the video. He says plain as day they did not reach a determination as to whether or not Trump committed a crime.

Tgo01

11-14-2019, 09:21 PM

He says it's not the right way to say it and still leaves it pretty ambiguous as to his meaning.

He says plain as day they did not reach a determination as to whether or not Trump committed a crime. I'm not sure what's so ambiguous about this.

What did he say in the video I linked?

What did he say in his official sworn testimony? Ted Lieu even gave him a perfect chance here to get Trump impeached without charging him with a crime, he asked something to the effect of "You would have charged Trump with a crime if not for the OLC opinion." Mueller originally answered yes to this question, and what I linked to is him clarifying his comment, stating they never reached a determination one way or another.

gemstonefella

11-14-2019, 09:23 PM

From the actual report:

First,a traditional prosecution or declination decision entails a binary determination to initiate or decline a prosecution, but we determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment. The Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) has issued an opinion finding that “the indictment or criminal prosecution of a sitting President would impermissibly undermine the capacity of the executive branch to perform its constitutionally assigned functions” in violation of“the constitutional separation of powers.”1Given the role of the Special Counsel as an attorney in the Department of Justice and the framework of the Special Counsel regulations, see 28 U.S.C. § 515; 28 C.F.R. § 600.7(a), this Office accepted OLC’s legal conclusion for the purpose ofexercising prosecutorial jurisdiction. And apart fromOLC’s constitutional view, we recognized that a federal criminal accusation against a sitting President would place burdens on the President’s capacity to govern and potentially preempt constitutional processes for addressing presidential misconduct.2