The Impeachment Thread

#21,403
#21,403
SpaceCoastVol said:
Yeah you are wrong because you refuse to read the whole thing and see it for what it was. And now you are all in, so you will lose face by admitting you were wrong.

I can live with it. You still look petty and foolish
Click to expand...
There is only one way to read into the statement you made, and that’s that you a ignorant little man. Losing face? In front of who? A couple people on this board know who I am and the rest I couldn’t care less what they think of me. I am glad you can can live with it, but own it. Don’t make racial, thinly veiled at that, statements and then deny it what you said or who you really are. I can be foolish and a smart ass...won’t deny that. But there is only one petty and small person here and it ain’t me sweetheart.
 
#21,409
#21,409
evillawyer said:
They advance arguments--good ones--for their position. In contrast, Turley just notes that the Constitutional convention rejected adding "maladministration." That says nothing about how they were defining bribery at the time. In fact, turley is begging the question by assuming bribery had a narrow definition and that what Trump did would only be covered by the amorphous "maladministration" provision that was rejected. He does nothing to explain what bribery meant at the time.
Click to expand...
At the time of the framers I believe they were concerned with Presidents taking bribes, not Presidents bribing others. Trump isn’t guilt of bribery here anyway but since you brought up context the point is relevant.
 
  • Like
Reactions: volfanjustin
#21,410
#21,410
hUTch2002 said:
At the time of the framers I believe they were concerned with Presidents taking bribes, not Presidents bribing others. Trump isn’t guilt of bribery here anyway but since you brought up context the point is relevant.
Click to expand...
And I believe the framers would challenge trump to a duel on the White House lawn if they were here today.
 
#21,414
#21,414
volfanjustin said:
And I believe they would look at today’s democrat/socialist party and asked what in the hell happened to this country
Click to expand...
They would probably dig out their copies of the Constitution, and see what they could have done to avoid this. It would be like where did we go wrong? We thought we had all the bases covered.
 
  • Like
Reactions: volfanjustin
#21,415
#21,415
1972 Grad said:
They would probably dig out their copies of the Constitution, and see what they could have done to avoid this. It would be like where did we go wrong? We thought we had all the bases covered.
Click to expand...
They would likely be glad they are dead so they don’t have to witness the lefts beliefs and agendas
 
#21,419
#21,419
luthervol said:
The republican defense has been dismantled piece by piece.

They are going to be left with "Well Trump maniacally yelled, 'I want nothing, no quid pro quo'" as their only defense.
Click to expand...
Saying those words is an admission that he didn't want the proper recorded channels to mix with the Giuliani channel. Face to face, no record, and through intermediaries.
 
  • Like
Reactions: luthervol
#21,421
#21,421
The framers would point to Trump and say "that is exactly what we were trying to avoid. He is why people fled their homelands and formed a new country"
 
  • Like
Reactions: PeaceCorpsVol
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top