The Impeachment Thread

#22,803
#22,803
Ty4Vols said:
Fake news, no quid pro quo, not firsthand info, I don't even know these people, Biden, Hillary, Fox News,, no collusion, Shifty Schiff, Nasty Nancy, the Dems, Obama, MAGA.

I just wanted to recap Trumps next 50 tweets so yall dont have to stay up tonight.
Click to expand...
I didn't see never Trumpers anywhere on the list.
 
#22,806
#22,806
Georgie... can you pull my strings, I'm in trouble here.
images
 
  • Like
Reactions: hjeagle1vol
#22,808
#22,808
Velo Vol said:
I don't know what the rules, deadlines may be in CA, but in TN corporations file a similar statement once a year. So the odds it files on a particular date can be no greater than 1 in ~360.
Click to expand...

Above my paygrade. I just looked at the date on the doc.
 
#22,811
#22,811
hjeagle1vol said:
Above my paygrade. I just looked at the date on the doc.
Click to expand...
The QAnon tweet says it's an "Articles of Incorporation." But it looks to me like it's just a renewal of registration that a corporation files every year.

[Again, my experience is in TN, not CA]
 
#22,813
#22,813
Rifleman said:
House GOP campaign uses CrowdStrike for their cyber security right now. How gullible are you?

Don’t answer that.
Click to expand...
No more gullible than Trump. There are literally a hundred different sites on the internet that have debunked that crazy theory that the Ukraine hacked the DNC and now has the server. Trump will never let it go... just like with the sharpie and the weather map. That's a very sick mind.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rifleman
#22,821
#22,821
Ty4Vols said:
Thanks to you as well. Single dad lying in bed with my daughter trying to not move so she doesn't wake up. I'm also not a loser. I saw Frozen 2 on opening day!
Wait....now I see it...
Click to expand...
Respect.

Insults are quickly hurled in the PF. It's easy to forget the real people behind the anonymous names. In truth, most of us would probably get along if we met IRL, as long as we didn't discuss politics, lol.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ty4Vols
#22,822
#22,822
RockyTop85 said:
Do I, though?
Here’s what I said your point was:


  1. Vindman is saying what you want to hear.



2. Vindman is political.



3. So, how can you know he can be trusted? (Also, I have no articulable reason not to trust him.)



4. Would he stand up to investigation?


5. It’s possible he’s a democrat.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I think you do. I think you focused on things around a point I was trying to make, albeit poorly, rather than the point itself. If all the politics were reversed in this case, and it was a Dem POTUS vs a GOP House, the left would attack the credibility of these witnesses just as the right is doing. A lot of "truth" is filtered through the prism of what you want to believe. Vindman was but an example, yet you and others seized upon that as me attacking the man. That was never the case nor my intention.

Also, you never answered my question if you thought the Dems have actually proven their case? That may not be the standard in the House, but what is your feeling?
 
#22,824
#22,824
JCP201 said:
The only tool is the President who made that phone call to Zelinsky which set off alarms for many interviewed in the impeachment hearing, including a lady who worked in Pence's office. Sondland, who gave a gajllion dollars to the President said there was a quid pro quo..

Most of these people testifying worked under Bush/Obama and even some longer than that, but we are to believe because they did their public duty and didn't ignore a subpoena they lean Democrat and are bias?

2+2=4 is that the money was released just after Congress became aware of the whistleblower complaint and the fact that Mulvaney said in a press conference that it was being held for investigations. (even though they had already investigated for corruption in that country and had gotten the Bi-partisan go ahead to release it to Ukraine) Zelinsky was warned by several not to get mixed up in American politics but must have felt he had no choice, since he planned to announce on CNN that he was investigating the Bidens to satisfy Trump. Once the money was released, he cancelled the interview.

You can have a benefit of the doubt, but there is more than enough evidence here to raise red flags and not start throwing a serviceman who has no criminal record under a bus because FOX news needed some smoke and mirrors.
Click to expand...
Sondland said he assumed there was a QPQ. None of the witnesses called provided actual proof of a QPQ ordered by Trump. Was enough presented to raise suspicion? I believe so, but that is just an opinion.

Opinions are shaped by what we want to believe. I think(my opinion) that going into this, the left wanted to believe Trump is guilty so they believe the case has been made that he is guilty. I also think that the right was certain that the left didn't have a case so nothing presented would sway them. Me personally, I thought he's capable of it, but can they establish a clear link of wrongdoing to Trump. And I don't feel they have. I agree there were a lot of suspicious things, but not one person has established that Trump said he wouldn't release the aid without an investigation. Nothing ties directly to Trump. That's a problem for me. If we talked probabilities, I'd say it was probable Trump did it. But I still feel burden of proof wasn't met. But that again returns us to opinion.

JMO, but people focus on what they want to be certainties and ignore possibilities. I don't think most people want to question what they believe.
 
  • Like
Reactions: W.TN.Orange Blood
#22,825
#22,825
Charges of Ukrainian Meddling? A Russian Operation, U.S. Intelligence Says

So...
Three unnamed American officials tell NYT about a classified meeting in recent weeks with Congress in which US intelligence officials have a briefing that aligned with what Dr Hill testified publicly regarding Russia being the “likely” source of the “fictional narrative” regarding possible Ukraine election meddling.

Again, the presumption that only one country can meddle at a time is preposterous, and the assumption that Russia had never nor will ever meddle again is naive.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top