The Impeachment Thread

#28,754
#28,754
luthervol said:
Nope.
I have said since day 1 that Trump should be removed by any means legally available.
It's not sacrificing principle, it's standing on principle.
Click to expand...
Which means anything goes since impeachment is a political process rather than a legal one. So you throwing that the term “legal” in there means absolutely nothing. The Dems threw legality out the window long ago.
 
  • Like
Reactions: volinsd and SpaceCoastVol
#28,755
#28,755
BowlBrother85 said:
We all know that Trump will not be removed from office. However, I'm glad to see that a stand has been taken by Democrats in the House against what Trump tried to do. I think Trump held up military aid to the Ukraine so he could hold it over Zelensky's head until he announced that he was opening an investigation into the Biden's on CNN. I don't think that Trump would have asked Zelensky to investigate the Bidens if Joe wasn't running for President. This was strictly about Trump wanting to damage Joe Biden politically. That type of conduct should not be tolerated. This has nothing to do with hurt feelings or with overthrowing a President or reversing the results from the 2016 election. This has to do with an abuse of power.
Click to expand...
The problem is that we don’t know that for sure. Your post is filled with “I think Trump...” and, in my opinion, you shouldn’t impeach any President on “I think”.
 
  • Like
Reactions: W.TN.Orange Blood
#28,758
#28,758
hUTch2002 said:
Which means anything goes since impeachment is a political process rather than a legal one. So you throwing that the term “legal” in there means absolutely nothing. The Dems threw legality out the window long ago.
Click to expand...
You say "legal" means nothing and then complain Dems threw out legality.
Make up your mind.
Does legality matter?
If so, then my stipulation of 'legal" means plenty.
If not, stop complaining.
 
#28,759
#28,759
Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) said Sunday he’s “disappointed” in the vast number of Republicans unwilling to put partisan politics aside to evaluate allegations of President Trump’s wrongdoing as part of the ongoing impeachment process.
Brown called out Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) for saying last week that he’ll work in “total coordination” with the White House during the expected Senate trial.
“It’s why I’m so disappointed in my colleagues’ see-no-evil, hear-no-evil attitude,” Brown said Sunday on CNN’s “State of the Union." “That they don’t want to look at anything that might disagree with their world view of Republicanism and this president.”
 
#28,760
#28,760
RockyTop85 said:
“What’s in a name? That which we call a rose

By any other name would smell as sweet:

So Bribery would, were it not Bribery called

Retain that dear corruption which it owes

Without that title.”
Click to expand...
A Shakespearean reply which translated means, Pelosi lied about the pretense. No surprise to me she did.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FLVOL69, 37L1 and hog88
#28,762
#28,762
luthervol said:
You say "legal" means nothing and then complain Dems threw out legality.
Make up your mind.
Does legality matter?
If so, then my stipulation of 'legal" means plenty.
If not, stop complaining.
Click to expand...
Once the Dems make up their mind I’ll make up mine. They claim it doesn’t matter that Trump didn’t commit bribery per the legal definition and that they don’t have to follow any kind of legal process because this isn’t a legal process but they complain about Trump not cooperating and claim he isn’t complying with subpoenas. If it isn’t a legal process then he doesn’t have to do so. Seems like I’m getting to you Luther. Maybe you need a break from the PF.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Orange_Vol1321
#28,763
#28,763
hUTch2002 said:
Once the Dems make up their mind I’ll make up mine. They claim it doesn’t matter that Trump didn’t commit bribery per the legal definition and that they don’t have to follow any kind of legal process because this isn’t a legal process but they complain about Trump not cooperating and claim he isn’t complying with subpoenas. If it isn’t a legal process then he doesn’t have to do so. Seems like I’m getting to you Luther. Maybe you need a break from the PF.
Click to expand...

Luther is a solid 8 on the TDS continuum.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Orange_Vol1321 and ajvol01
#28,770
#28,770
hUTch2002 said:
The problem is that we don’t know that for sure. Your post is filled with “I think Trump...” and, in my opinion, you shouldn’t impeach any President on “I think”.
Click to expand...
Do you think that President Trump obstructed Congress so they couldn't call those important first hand witnesses? That was one of the articles and it was still voted down.
 
#28,771
#28,771
JCP201 said:
Do you think that President Trump obstructed Congress so they couldn't call those important first hand witnesses? That was one of the articles and it was still voted down.
Click to expand...
Nope. We have the transcript.

Don’t need firsthand witnesses when you have the entire contents of the phone call - the entire thing is a political stunt gone awry - it’s just bad for the country.

Has it ever crossed your mind that they’re literally trying to remove the POTUS from office less than 1 year prior to an election over a phone conversation?
 
  • Like
Reactions: hUTch2002, davethevol and DC_Vol
#28,772
#28,772
lawgator1 said:
You can take whatever you want out of context. Won't change the fact that Trump attempted to bribe the president of Ukraine and abused his powers in the process. He was willing to sell them, and us, out to get reelected. Support for him is shameful.
Click to expand...
What percentage would you give that one or both of the Bidens is involved in corruption?
 
#28,773
#28,773
ajvol01 said:
Nope. We have the transcript.

Don’t need firsthand witnesses when you have the entire contents of the phone call - the entire thing is a political stunt gone awry - it’s just bad for the country.

Has it ever crossed your mind that they’re literally trying to remove the POTUS from office less than 1 year prior to an election over a phone conversation?
Click to expand...
The first hand witnesses could definitely tell us why he with held the aid-- Why is Rudy anywhere near this, etc.
 
#28,775
#28,775
JCP201 said:
The first hand witnesses could definitely tell us why he with held the aid-- Why is Rudy anywhere near this, etc.
Click to expand...
Did you know the phone call on 7/25/2019 was literally the day after Robert Mueller testified on 7/24/2019?

You honestly don’t see this as being politically motivated in any way?
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top