The Impeachment Thread

If you notice I caught that errant thought and edited it nearly an hour before you posted, and thought I'd dumped it on the original post.

I didn't imply Trump starts the investigation or there can be no investigation, but that if being a candidate didn't shield Trump from investigation, neither does it shield Biden regardless of party affiliation or who he's running against. The entire impeachment charade rest on the premise that Trump was trying to damage a rival...who isn't even a rival. If Biden had been some congressman from Kansas running for the Senate, we wouldn't be talking now. Neither should have bearing on whether conflict of interest should be investigated.

Of course an independent investigation is an alternative, a preferred one, so long as it is not baseless like this impeachment or the Mueller probe.
The why do you keep talking about. Biden being shielded from investigation?

I’m literally saying that it’s a conflict of interest for Trump to get involved in the investigation of a political rival but that DOJ is free to start an independent investigation, just like they did into Trump in 2017.

And you keep arguing “but if trump wasn’t shielded from investigation then neither is Biden.”

How does that in any way respond to what I’m saying? You’re creating a straw man argument and then debating it instead of the actual argument that I’m putting on the page.
 
It is called changing ones mind and deciding to disengage.
You only bring insults to this forum and no substance or even humor.

No, silly, that's just a lack of self control.

You only regurgitate the opinions of talking heads that confirm your own bias. That's way worse than my using this as a means to entertain myself whilst taking a ****.
If you have a problem with my posts, then feel free to use the ignore feature or simply go somewhere else. If things were as you say they are, then surely the mods would have banned me a long, long time ago. Who knows? Maybe they just keep me around to interrupt the right wing circle jerk.
 
No, silly, that's just a lack of self control.

You only regurgitate the opinions of talking heads that confirm your own bias. That's way worse than my using this as a means to entertain myself whilst taking a ****.
If you have a problem with my posts, then feel free to use the ignore feature or simply go somewhere else. If things were as you say they are, then surely the mods would have banned me a long, long time ago. Who knows? Maybe they just keep me around to interrupt the right wing circle jerk.
You are kept here to make the rest of us feel better about ourselves. I think the old saying is "there but for the grace of God, go I."
 
You are kept here to make the rest of us feel better about ourselves. I think the old saying is "there but for the grace of God, go I."


If you need me to make yourself feel better, I'd suggest a bottle of Xanax and cheap gin instead. You'll find the results much more pleasing.
Also, /yawn.
 
No, silly, that's just a lack of self control.

You only regurgitate the opinions of talking heads that confirm your own bias. That's way worse than my using this as a means to entertain myself whilst taking a ****.
If you have a problem with my posts, then feel free to use the ignore feature or simply go somewhere else. If things were as you say they are, then surely the mods would have banned me a long, long time ago. Who knows? Maybe they just keep me around to interrupt the right wing circle jerk.

I don’t have a problem with your posts , I like watching you b!tch and complain about everything . Keeps the rest of us grounded when we have you as a barometer on the ole B!tch-O-meter .
 
I don’t have a problem with your posts , I like watching you b!tch and complain about everything . Keeps the rest of us grounded when we have you as a barometer on the ole B!tch-O-meter .


Wait, I'm either complaining or I'm insulting. You can't have it both ways.

I also wouldn't go as far as attempting to speak for the rest of the forum (unless you're speaking for you and your woman property). It would be an insult to their literacy level.
 
Wait, I'm either complaining or I'm insulting. You can't have it both ways.

I also wouldn't go as far as attempting to speak for the rest of the forum (unless you're speaking for you and your woman property). It would be an insult to their literacy level.

I think I can speak for enough of us to tell you what I did . I’ve got two for sure I can speak for , anymore and that’s just icing on the cake .
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
They weren't "redactions" but deletions of doubled-up posts.
A grown ass adult doesn't assume things he doesn't know or call people he doesn't know "turd gobblers".


It is called changing ones mind and deciding to disengage.

No one actually knows each other here. Everyone is a turd gobbler until proven otherwise.

I don't buy it. Mods usually just delete doubled up posts. They were redacted.
 
I know by experience you are little more than one of those “mean girls “ that likes come in , to b!tch and complain , then run off . I just call it like I see it .

Eh, you haven't been posting here in the PF very long. I used to be more engaged in discussion, but tbh folks like you have popped up more frequently in the past couple of years and it's really tanked the quality of conversation so what little time I do spend in here is generally going to either give daps to the few good puns or to harangue (or complain as you call it) the knuckledragging discourse.

It's funny you reference mean girls, since a great majority of *your* posts are spent denigrating anyone who doesn't gargle the POTUS's mcnuggets with all their great lack of wisdom.
 
Eh, you haven't been posting here in the PF very long. I used to be more engaged in discussion, but tbh folks like you have popped up more frequently in the past couple of years and it's really tanked the quality of conversation so what little time I do spend in here is generally going to either give daps to the few good puns or to harangue (or complain as you call it) the knuckledragging discourse.

It's funny you reference mean girls, since a great majority of *your* posts are spent denigrating anyone who doesn't gargle the POTUS's mcnuggets with all their great lack of wisdom.

Like I said .. you pop in , you b!tch /complain then run off . I didn’t ask for an explanation. Don’t really care . I already told you I like it , it’s a good barometer for the rest of us . We know as long as we don’t sink to the Dink level on the B!tch-o- meter , we good .
 
Like I said .. you pop in , you b!tch /complain then run off . I didn’t ask for an explanation. Don’t really care . I already told you I like it , it’s a good barometer for the rest of us . We know as long as we don’t sink to the Dink level on the B!tch-o- meter , we good .

Run off? lol. It's a forum you dingus. Sorry if I have better things to do than to stay on for more than a short stint and sling feces with you.

There you go insulting the rest of VN by attempting to speak for them again.
 
Run off? lol. It's a forum you dingus. Sorry if I have better things to do than to stay on for more than a short stint and sling feces with you.

There you go insulting the rest of VN by attempting to speak for them again.

I’ve already told you I can speak for two anybody past that is a few, and icing on the cake . It’s nice to have you as a barometer . 😉
 
  • Like
Reactions: NurseGoodVol
The why do you keep talking about. Biden being shielded from investigation?

I’m literally saying that it’s a conflict of interest for Trump to get involved in the investigation of a political rival but that DOJ is free to start an independent investigation, just like they did into Trump in 2017.

And you keep arguing “but if trump wasn’t shielded from investigation then neither is Biden.”

How does that in any way respond to what I’m saying? You’re creating a straw man argument and then debating it instead of the actual argument that I’m putting on the page.

His point is that since Biden is not the Dem nominee he is not a political rival, he is just another citizen. If Biden had secured the nomination you might have a point.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64 and NCFisher
The why do you keep talking about. Biden being shielded from investigation?

I’m literally saying that it’s a conflict of interest for Trump to get involved in the investigation of a political rival but that DOJ is free to start an independent investigation, just like they did into Trump in 2017.

And you keep arguing “but if trump wasn’t shielded from investigation then neither is Biden.”

How does that in any way respond to what I’m saying? You’re creating a straw man argument and then debating it instead of the actual argument that I’m putting on the page.

And I'm literally saying I disagree. There's no straw man.

A potential COI is a *concern*, not an impeachable offense, which requires motivation, a corrupt intent. He literally mentioned it - a very high profile potential COI - along with 2016 interference, then moved on. Biden isn't Trump's rival until he's nominated. And even nomination doesn't stitch the president's lips together so he can't say "hey, this looks rotten and should be looked into".

He can't be involved in an investigation that isn't occurring. If such investigation occurs and THEN he tries to direct, manage or influence it, you have a point.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
His point is that since Biden is not the Dem nominee he is not a political rival, he is just another citizen. If Biden had secured the nomination you might have a point.

Partly, but I go a bit beyond that. I think the president, if he thinks a serious conflict of interest or crime has occurred, can sound the alarm regardless of whether the person is a rival or not. He cannot direct or be part of that investigation, but he sure as hell can sound an alarm.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1972 Grad and AM64
Advertisement

Back
Top