Pelosi officially announces impeachment inquiry

[Wrathbringer]

Of course not. Except you do. You're just a liar.







How anyone on the left has a problem the following, I have no idea:

1) The president taking no salary
2) Badass economy
3) All time low unemployment across the board
4) Wages up
5) Illegal immigration down
6) Other countries ponying up
7) China getting pwned
8) ISIS getting pwned
9) Hillary getting pwned
10) Calling out the climate change hoax the left is pushing for what it is



Wait, I do know. It's called "pulling the blue blanket over your head."

Golly, that was easy.

Let's also not forget how the DNC rigged the primaries and tried (but failed) to rig the general election.

Seriously, we need to see Hunter Biden’s tax returns.

Common theme: BriarFox has no idea.

I'm shocked.

Really.

These are all correct.

[Wrathbringer]

1) So Trump didn't say, "Russia, if you're listening, I hope you're able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing" in July 2016, inviting them to hack the DNC? Even if you shrug that off, how about supporting stronger election protections so that foreign powers can't interfere? Any protests to that? Because McConnell has been stonewalling it until yesterday.
2) Trump didn't spend most of his efforts at the G7 trying to get Russia reinstated as a member? https://thinkprogress.org/trump-is-l...-ae70323028a8/
3) I don't know what you're referencing here. I'm referring to the use of his properties for public purposes.
4) I actually agree that China is abusive and our trade policies need to be revised, but Trump's handled it in an extremely erratic fashion.
5) So, you disagree with 99% of scientists? Even if you somehow do justify that, do you disagree that the temperatures are rising and that we need to do something about them so that human life across the globe isn't irrevocably changed?

1) I think Trump was serious, but I suppose that's a matter of opinion. However, at this direction, his campaign communicated in detail with Russia to get dirt on Clinton. The first section of the Mueller report details this situation in depth. Also, come on, trying somehow to deflect with "But Obama?!"
2) The economic situation with fuel doesn't offset Trump's support of Russia elsewhere
3) From your article: "Forbes attributed the decline of Trump's fortune to three main factors: e-commerce eating into the value of Trump's real estate holdings, the intrusion of heightened security at Trump's resorts, and Trump's own over-reporting of the size of his penthouse ..."Much as he's trying — and he's definitely trying — Donald Trump is not getting richer off the presidency," according to Forbes." None of that changes the fact that, as Forbes states in your article, Trump's been trying to enrich himself. I am glad to find out that overall it's a failure, but it doesn't excuse the attempt.
4) Sure, we can agree to disagree here.
5) I don't know where you come from in disagreeing with the entire scientific community, so I guess there's nothing to discuss here.

1. So you're saying that, despite the fact Trump encouraged Russia to help him, and Russia did, it's all Obama's fault for not forcing through better election security? Obama is to blame because he didn't stop Trump and Russia?
2. I accept that those things are happening, but they don't address the broader concern. You're fine with Trump's support of Russia in the G8, which was so strong that it led insiders to suspect he was either a Russian spy or a Russian dupe? https://www.businessinsider.com/spie...n-asset-2019-8
3. Ok, let's run with that. Even if every previous president enriched himself, for the sake of argument, should Trump?
4.
5. So, what about taking a practical stance on a solution, then, regardless of the cause of climate change?

These are all retarded.

[~Rocktar~]

For sure LEDs are better than old fashioned incandescent bulbs, the only issue was the upfront cost but even that is hardly a problem anymore.

Unfortunately not true. More efficient, longer lasting, yes. They still make loads more pollution to manufacture that we export to other countries since they aren't made in the US and the cost can be prohibitive to many still. Old plain bulbs were a buck for 4, LEDs are a good bit more than that and yes, that is still a choice some people have to make. Just another case of Leftist policies that are not thought through hurting the poorest among us. Just like the GM bailout, cash for clunkers (A massive payoff to the UAW) and Obamacare.

[Wrathbringer]

https://www.amazon.com/ask/questions..._sa_saa_al_hza

[Tgo01]

Reporter question: "The underlying problem here was of course Hunter Biden receiving $50,000 a month from a Ukrainian energy company. Do you think that that is evidence of corrupt behavior?"

Rep. Ted Lieu: "No. People sit on boards and they get monetary payments."

No shit people who sit on boards get monetary payments. The problem is Hunter Biden had exactly ZERO QUALIFICATIONS other than his father was VP at the time.

Holy shit the Democrats are nothing but a joke of a party now.

[Tgo01]

There is talk of keeping the "whistleblower" anonymous.

So let me get this straight; a whistleblower with no firsthand knowledge of anything they are alleging, is going to be able to level charges against Trump and testify before Congress...all anonymously?

Yup, nothing shady going on here! Is this the new standard Democrats want to implement? Not only guilty before proven innocent but now the accused doesn't even get to face their accuser?

[Gelston]

They aren't trying to really impeach him. They want to make him look as bad as possible prior to the election.

[audioserf]

I don't think the Dems think the Senate will indict nor do they think Trump will be removed from office.

I think they're hoping for like the 1% chance he says 'fuck this' and resigns to go back to being a rich dude and doing whatever he wants (he won't do this)

Otherwise yes they're hoping it makes him look shitty enough to help them limp Brainworms Biden across the line in 2020. They also probably feel enough pressure to at least TRY to do something given how much of the party want Trump to ever face a consequence for anything. They have to look like they're trying. They're worried about their own seats more than they're worried about Trump.

[Fortybox]

I don't think the Dems think the Senate will indict nor do they think Trump will be removed from office.

I think they're hoping for like the 1% chance he says 'fuck this' and resigns to go back to being a rich dude and doing whatever he wants (he won't do this)

Otherwise yes they're hoping it makes him look shitty enough to help them limp Brainworms Biden across the line in 2020. They also probably feel enough pressure to at least TRY to do something given how much of the party want Trump to ever face a consequence for anything. They have to look like they're trying. They're worried about their own seats more than they're worried about Trump.

No, they are doing this so they get access to the supposed "real" dirt on him. If they can impeach him they can get at his tax returns, business dealings, etc. They'll look for anything to make him look bad in time for the election, which is why this was magically timed now, about 1 year to go before the election.

[Parkbandit]

They aren't trying to really impeach him. They want to make him look as bad as possible prior to the election.