The Impeachment Thread

#20,827
#20,827
peaygolf said:
.
170517-al-green-ew-630p_91f9fbd187c62d1c3d112727dd4f64b7.fit-760w.jpg

View attachment 239422
Click to expand...
Al Green, The Missing Link.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SpaceCoastVol and peaygolf
#20,829
#20,829
BigOrangeD said:
Did a little research on these guys. It seems they work for your side. Again this is an opinion piece.
Protect Democracy Project (PDP)
Click to expand...

Don't commit the genetic fallacy. Look at the arguments, not who's advancing them. These guys are making solid historical legal arguments. If you got any republican attorneys making the same type of arguments, link them. I told you Turley's take is question-begging if it's not backed up by an analysis of what bribery means in the Constitution.
 
#20,834
#20,834
evillawyer said:
Don't commit the genetic fallacy. Look at the arguments, not who's advancing them. These guys are making solid historical legal arguments. If you got any republican attorneys making the same type of arguments, link them. I told you Turley's take is question-begging if it's not backed up by an analysis of what bribery means in the Constitution.
Click to expand...
No you’re just discounting his legal opinion out of hand and trying to sell it. I hate his politics but he has a strong legal mind and his message was quite clear.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BigOrangeD
#20,835
#20,835
evillawyer said:
Don't commit the genetic fallacy. Look at the arguments, not who's advancing them. These guys are making solid historical legal arguments. If you got any republican attorneys making the same type of arguments, link them. I told you Turley's take is question-begging if it's not backed up by an analysis of what bribery means in the Constitution.
Click to expand...
Your source is skeptical at best.
 
#20,837
#20,837
luthervol said:
LOL....Of course he would say that. What kind of idiot do you think he is? He's not going to risk getting on Trump's bad side.
Click to expand...

Oh, so in Delirious dem eyes, his testimony means nothing cause he had no other choice than to say that. Only problem there is that all of the testimony to date corroborates even his statements. But hey, what are facts. they don't matter. We hate the prez and we vowed to do anything, whatever it takes, to get rid of him for beating Hils.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VolnJC
#20,839
#20,839
VolnJC said:
Shifty racking up on the wooden noses
Click to expand...


Must remain anonymous. Cause it's a ghost. Doesn't exist. Never has. Just a character creation by the Dem plants that went to Schiff saying they think they got something. Then they all sat around making up a complaint to file. the only thing they would expose if they allowed the whistleblower to come forth is themselves. Whatever it takes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VolnJC
#20,840
#20,840
NorthDallas40 said:
No you’re just discounting his legal opinion out of hand and trying to sell it. I hate his politics but he has a strong legal mind and his message was quite clear.
Click to expand...

Here's Turley's argument:

(1) The Constitutional convention rejected "misadministration" as a basis for impeachment.

(2) The Constitutional convention included bribery as a basis for impeachment.

Therefore, what Trump did is not bribery.

The only way that conclusion follows is if what Trump did falls under misadministration and not bribery. To say it doesn't fall under bribery without undertaking any analysis of what that term means is just assuming what is to be proven (that is, begging the question).
 
#20,841
#20,841
evillawyer said:
Here's Turley's argument:

(1) The Constitutional convention rejected "misadministration" as a basis for impeachment.

(2) The Constitutional convention included bribery as a basis for impeachment.

Therefore, what Trump did is not bribery.

The only way that conclusion follows is if what Trump did falls under misadministration and not bribery. To say it doesn't fall under bribery without undertaking any analysis of what that term means is just assuming what is to be proven (that is, begging the question).
Click to expand...
Take it up with Turley! He disagrees and his opinion on the price of beans in China would carry more weight 10 out of 10 times than yours. Nobody is buying what you’re selling.
 
#20,846
#20,846
VolnJC said:
Vindman has like less than zero credibility after yesterday
Click to expand...

He could get blow back on that as it’s clear that his testimony is different than Morrison’s. And I believe he admitted as such. Thus I believe he is in conflict with the UCMJ in a very formal and documented fashion on a factual matter, lying within regards to factual data to Congress. And while Congress doesn’t care much about lying out Military Officer corps has some pretty strong feelings on it. As a minimum he is expedited quietly into retirement I’ll guess.
 
#20,849
#20,849
GVF said:
Oh, so in Delirious dem eyes, his testimony means nothing cause he had no other choice than to say that. Only problem there is that all of the testimony to date corroborates even his statements. But hey, what are facts. they don't matter. We hate the prez and we vowed to do anything, whatever it takes, to get rid of him for beating Hils.
Click to expand...
Once again. This has never had anything to do with beating Hillary. None of the other 16 would have gone through this.
This is all about Trump; nothing more, nothing less. The sooner you guys process that fact the better.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top