The Impeachment Thread

[hog88]

Me: “I would support independent investigations, run by the DOJ, without interference or input from the president.”
You: “oh yeah? What about MUELLER?!?!”

Does this even require an explanation or should I move on to Horowitz?

Please move on to Horowitz since you have struck out with your support of the Muells investigation. With the bombshell dropped today you have a massive amount of egg to wipe off your face.

 

[Septic]

Keep it up Septic. It's a great strategy to get Trump reelected in 2020. Isn't it almost nap time for you today?

Yes as was the case in 2016, my making fun of the red hat bozo brigade on an anonymous internet forum was and is going to be solely responsible for turning the tide of the election. My bad America.

Welcome to the political forum kid, your condescension skill are going to need some work though - it may get some high fives from the local mouthbreathers but it doesn't move me at all.

 

[ajvol01]

Trumps 'word' is a worth less than nothing. Therefore no one should be surprised at the circular logic of holding out trump's tweet as proof.... par for the course.

Honestly, he's probably too dumb to realize he's doing it.

but.... He's still doing it.

Trump still uses his personal cell phone despite warnings and increased call scrutiny


Your selective outrage is selective.

Anonymous sources are still better than the POTUS own words?

Former officials. Sounds legit.

 

[Septic]

Anonymous sources are still better than the POTUS own words?

Former officials. Sounds legit.

LOL, resoundingly yes.

Trump is a proven liar, it's not even debatable.

Oh, speaking of which... a little honesty on your part would lend a little credibility your posts.

The lapse was only amplified by the fact that Sondland made the call in public, where it could have been easily overheard and in a foreign country that is already being targeted by foreign adversaries of the US, including Russia, current and former officials said.

 

[smoke_em06]

Yes as was the case in 2016, my making fun of the red hat bozo brigade on an anonymous internet forum was and is going to be solely responsible for turning the tide of the election. My bad America.

Welcome to the political forum kid, your condescension skill are going to need some work though - it may get some high fives from the local mouthbreathers but it doesn't move me at all.

Tick Tock Tick Tock. You're still here with no viable strategy for 2020 and we're still winning. Nap time is over I guess!

 

[ajvol01]

LOL, resoundingly yes.

Trump is a proven liar, it's not even debatable.

Oh, speaking of which... a little honesty on your part would lend a little credibility your posts.

Is the janitor an official? What qualifies someone with the official title of official?

On the record sources: ZERO

 

[Septic]

Tick Tock Tick Tock. You're still here with no viable strategy for 2020 and we're still winning. Nap time is over I guess!

I'm a libertarian you goof, I hope both sides lose.

By the way, what specifically do you think you're winning at? Or are you one of those nuts who think the POTUS being impeached is somehow going to help?

 

[smoke_em06]

I'm a libertarian you goof, I hope both sides lose.

By the way, what specifically do you think you're winning at? Or are you one of those nuts who think the POTUS being impeached is somehow going to help?

This is great. I don't have to win at anything because you snowflakes are doing that for me.

 

[NEO]

I'm a libertarian you goof, I hope both sides lose.

By the way, what specifically do you think you're winning at? Or are you one of those nuts who think the POTUS being impeached is somehow going to help?

My taxes went down a lot with the new rates.

The pass through tax cuts alone cut mine greatly. Went on two extra vacations this year with it, put extra money in the bank, and invested extra money in marketing and the business.....all with the money I saved alone.

Sorry, but I vote with my wallet mainly.

 

[Septic]

Is the janitor an official? What qualifies someone with the official title of official?

On the record sources: ZERO

I guess I should have anticipated your naivete given your predisposition to being a Q guy.

 

[RockyTop85]

Please move on to Horowitz since you have struck out with your support of the Muells investigation. With the bombshell dropped today you have a massive amount of egg to wipe off your face.

Ok. You’re reaching the point of nonsensical babbling, so I’ll just interpret this to mean that you understand how incredibly stupid you sounded and now admit that Mueller’s investigation was 100% consistent with what I’ve said I would support visa vis Biden and is 100% different from the President of the United States calling up a foreign country and asking them to initiate an investigation of a political rival that his own DOJ declined when his personal lawyer shopped it to them.

Moving on to Horowitz/Crossfire Hurricane.

Again, 100% consistent. Crossfire Hurricane was the predecessor of the Mueller investigation. Both were independent investigations run by DOJ, with no political interference and a sufficient factual predicate based on evidence provided by a friendly foreign government.

With respect to Horowitz, my position has always had two prongs:

1. I don’t think there was wrongdoing, but if there was, punish it.

2. Unless there is a difference between FISA and normal warrants that takes it outside my experience, this idea that Horowitz will be a silver bullet that unravels the entire investigation is fabulist nonsense that is being pitched by partisan grifters.

I was partially wrong. There were procedural abuses. Steps should be taken to correct that.
So far, what I’ve said about part 2 has been echoed by other attorneys with federal experience, and it was not contradicted in the Horowitz report or anywhere else, that I’m aware of.
I have become aware of some FISA differences, but none that change my belief about what the outcome would be on a motion to suppress, and that Franks would be the standard applied to any challenge.

Feel free to quote where I’ve said something inconsistent or where I have posted “falsehoods.” I haven’t. Otherwise, I’ll move on to your most ridiculous example of all: constitutional impeachment.

 

[lawgator1]

Ready to do thy bidding, master.

 

[Septic]

My taxes went down a lot with the new rates.

The pass through tax cuts alone cut mine greatly. Went on two extra vacations this year with it, put extra money in the bank, and invested extra money in marketing and the business.....all with the money I saved alone.

Sorry, but I vote with my wallet mainly.

Hell, I'm fiscally conservative too and also greatly benefited by the 199a cuts. I hate taxes, more specifically - I hate what the government squanders those taxes on. However, life isn't as black and white for me, you do you - It'd be convenient to be a single issue voter, but life is shades of gray.

 

[RikidyBones]

I don't believe that you are truly this naive. Since when has Donald Trump shown an interest in rooting out corruption, even in his own administration? Trump allowed Scott Pruitt to stay on as EPA Administrator for several months after it had become apparent that Pruitt was self-dealing and wasting tax payer money on ridiculous things (such as "tactical pants"). Trump has also had other corrupt cabinet members such as Ryan Zinke and Tom Price. It's not corruption that Trump was interested in investigating, it was the Bidens - and only because Joe was running for President.

...and it hasn't already backfired. That is just empty talk.

Look.. I'm not interested in what you assume about a situation. Your assumption is inconsequential. As an American voter, I too, would like to know if Biden has used his position for personal benefit like he admits.

 

[BowlBrother85]

Look.. I'm not interested in what you assume about a situation. Your assumption is inconsequential. As an American voter, I too, would like to know if Biden has used his position for personal benefit like he admits.

How has he admitted to that? In what context?

 

[RikidyBones]

How has he admitted to that? In what context?

Getting the prosecutor fired. We only have the ability to insert conjecture. Investigate it. See where it stands and what ukraine was told. If it comes out that there was a legit motive, then we can move on and he wont be burdened by it from moderates and probably wins the election.

 

[ajvol01]

I guess I should have anticipated your naivete given your predisposition to being a Q guy.

List the names of everyone who stated this on the record.

 

[Septic]

This is great. I don't have to win at anything because you snowflakes are doing that for me.

You keep talking, but you're not saying anything. Unless you want to be relegated to the kiddy table - you'll need to quit talking like a trump tweet and stop acting like your schtick is unique and will twist the libs in knots. Your goofy name calling and chucklehead 'lulz' posting style is better suited for the breitbart.com forums. From what I've seen from you thus far, you're going to get burned down without much effort my most of the regulars here.

Good luck.

 

[NEO]

Hell, I'm fiscally conservative too and also greatly benefited by the 199a cuts. I hate taxes, more specifically - I hate what the government squanders those taxes on. However, life isn't as black and white for me, you do you - It'd be convenient to be a single issue voter, but life is shades of gray.

Life is gray, black, and white and full of color which is all handled by the Supreme Court honestly.

The feds only see green and deal with green.

Any bill outside of taxes can be pretty much overturned by the SC and has been if they disagree.

Obamacare was only put through because the SC viewer it as a tax.

I care way more about who will be placed on the bench and next up is Amy baby!!!!!

 

[BowlBrother85]

Getting the prosecutor fired. We only have the ability to insert conjecture. Investigate it. See where it stands and what ukraine was told. If it comes out that there was a legit motive, then we can move on and he wont be burdened by it from moderates and probably wins the election.

Viktor Shokin wasn't fired for investigating Burisma Holdings. That investigation had been dormant for several months at the time that Shokin was fired. Shokin was fired because he WASN'T investigating corruption in the Ukraine. During Shokin's time as General Prosecutor of the Ukraine, he failed to obtain a conviction of any major public figure. No oligarch, no bureaucrat, no politician, nobody was convicted in the cesspool that is the Ukraine. You, just like Trump and his supporters, are taking a 20 second video clip out of context. Watch the entirety of that conference/interview he was in. It is not what you seem to think it is. All evidence points to Shokin being more a part of the corruption in the Ukraine, than he was someone trying to put a stop to it.

 

[Septic]

List the names of everyone who stated this on the record.

This is what I'm talking about, the naivete of believing that if it's not on the record - it can't be true.

Doubly ironic that you'd demand this given your devotion to an anonymous 4chan poster who refuses to show his true identity.

Do you not realize your cognitive dissonance in your demand?

 

[CagleMtnVol]

He's even shorter than I thought.

 

[Septic]

Getting the prosecutor fired. We only have the ability to insert conjecture. Investigate it. See where it stands and what ukraine was told. If it comes out that there was a legit motive, then we can move on and he wont be burdened by it from moderates and probably wins the election.

Biden, the whole administration and the GOP Congress including our allies all supported removal of the prosecutor. This is conveniently left out of the narrative - everyone wanted him gone.

 

[Septic]

He's even shorter than I thought.

I'm sure that badgering him in a MAGA hat rattled him into changing his vote.

On a side note, Nadler could double for the Penguin if he replaced his glasses for a monocle.

 

[volinbham]

Viktor Shokin wasn't fired for investigating Burisma Holdings. That investigation had been dormant for several months at the time that Shokin was fired. Shokin was fired because he WASN'T investigating corruption in the Ukraine. During Shokin's time as General Prosecutor of the Ukraine, he failed to obtain a conviction of any major public figure. No oligarch, no bureaucrat, no politician, nobody was convicted in the cesspool that is the Ukraine. You, just like Trump and his supporters, are taking a 20 second video clip out of context. Watch the entirety of that conference/interview he was in. It is not what you seem to think it is. All evidence points to Shokin being more a part of the corruption in the Ukraine, than he was someone trying to put a stop to it.

Not so fast. It was active at the time of Biden's actions. (see below). I'm not saying with certainty that Biden was moving to protect his son and his actions MAY have been legit. However, it's undeniable that Burisma was being investigated and the guy leading it was pressured out by Biden's threat of withholding aid.

Media Attack on John Solomon Is an Attack on the Free Press | RealClearPolitics

But the Daily Beast, not John Solomon, was guilty of false reporting. Rather than being “dormant,” Shokin’s investigation into Burisma was active at the time Biden claimed to have had Shokin fired.

Just a month before, in February 2016, Shokin’s office had sought and won court-ordered seizures of property owned by Burisma’s founder, some of which had been seized the year before. Even the Washington Post documented that Ukrainian prosecutors sent evidence about Burisma to a U.S.-funded, FBI-assisted law enforcement bureau in December 2015 — the same month Biden addressed Ukraine’s parliament and privately urged Shokin’s firing. And as Solomon has reported, but his critics in the press seem to have ignored, Burisma’s lawyer at a high-powered New York law firm wrote to the Ukrainian prosecutor general about Burisma in May of 2016, several month after Shokin had been replaced. That same lawyer gave an interview in Ukraine detailing his defense strategy, which culminated in a court concluding in September 2016 that “no criminal procedures should be taken” against Burisma’s founder. Reuters and others have reported that the investigation into Burisma was not officially closed until 10 months after Shokin was fired.