The Impeachment Thread

#30,451
#30,451
volinbham said:
Damned if you do/don't. Those vulnerable Dems who voted yes won't get primaried but might get hammered in the general for the vote.

Agree NP had no choice. Would have lost more seats if they didn't pursue since base has been clamoring for this since Nov 9, 2016
Click to expand...
Had she not pursued it they would have fared worse in the general? They would have had more socialists on the ballot, so maybe you're right about that.
 
#30,453
#30,453
McDad said:
Disagree. The testimony we discussed the other day was lacking evidence. But perhaps evidence isn't required in this sort of thing.
Click to expand...
Don't overlook the fact that Trump kept everyone with direct knowledge from testifying. It's critical.
 
#30,454
#30,454
BowlBrother85 said:
Rand Pauls complaints about "selected witnesses" is odd. The Trump allies in the White House who were subpoenaed, refused to appear before the House. The witnesses who did appear were all highly relevant to the proceedings, especially the two United States Ambassadors to the Ukraine (Marie Yovanovitch and William Taylor), Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman (who was on the July 25th phone call) and Gordon Sondland (a Trump appointee who is the United States Ambassador to the European Union). Not all of the witnesses gave testimony damaging to Trump (such as Kurt Volker).

That is a lame defense. If the Trump Administration feels the witnesses were unbalanced against them, they could have allowed others such as John Bolton and Mike Pompeo to testify. They didn't want that.
Click to expand...

Or the Dems could have allowed Republicans to call witnesses. Or Schiff could have released transcripts from all the witnesses that testified, not just the ones he felt supported the cause.

Nah, who am I kidding
 
  • Like
Reactions: DC_Vol, Orangeburst and 1972 Grad
#30,456
#30,456
McDad said:
Disagree. The testimony we discussed the other day was lacking evidence. But perhaps evidence isn't required in this sort of thing.
Click to expand...

Here is the cliffs notes for ya..... all that is required for impeachment is just quid pro quo....... or treason........... or bribery........... and if you can't prove any of those and your focus groups start leaving the room...... well, how about abuse of power.......

23spvr.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: volinbham
#30,457
#30,457
BowlBrother85 said:
Rand Pauls complaints about "selected witnesses" is odd. The Trump allies in the White House who were subpoenaed, refused to appear before the House. The witnesses who did appear were all highly relevant to the proceedings, especially the two United States Ambassadors to the Ukraine (Marie Yovanovitch and William Taylor), Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman (who was on the July 25th phone call) and Gordon Sondland (a Trump appointee who is the United States Ambassador to the European Union). Not all of the witnesses gave testimony damaging to Trump (such as Kurt Volker).

That is a lame defense. If the Trump Administration feels the witnesses were unbalanced against them, they could have allowed others such as John Bolton and Mike Pompeo to testify. They didn't want that.
Click to expand...
This.......all day long.
 
#30,459
#30,459
RavinDave said:
Had she not pursued it they would have fared worse in the general? They would have had more socialists on the ballot, so maybe you're right about that.
Click to expand...

Thinking that base slanted districts would see primary challenges from more extreme candidates that might win a primary but be too nuts for the general.

Plus good ole Bloomberg came in with a campaign cash for votes scheme that balled Nancy out.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tbwhhs and RavinDave
#30,461
#30,461
luthervol said:
Don't overlook the fact that Trump kept everyone with direct knowledge from testifying. It's critical.
Click to expand...
I don't see how. If the folks are compelled to testify if subpoenaed by Congress and the constitution dictates he must do so, that is impeachable imo.

However, testimony never provided is neither pro or con for the outcome. Simply because it never occured. Thinking it is or could be is simply projecting.
 
#30,462
#30,462
BowlBrother85 said:
Regardless of ideology or party affiliation, everyone here should be proud of our country tonight. A stand was taken against corruption with the President being held accountable for his actions. Our leaders are not above the law. They are not above scrutiny. God Bless America!
Click to expand...
Oh mylanta
 
  • Like
Reactions: 0nelilreb, Rishvol, StarRaider and 1 other person
#30,463
#30,463
volinbham said:
Or the Dems could have allowed Republicans to call witnesses. Or Schiff could have released transcripts from all the witnesses that testified, not just the ones he felt supported the cause.

Nah, who am I kidding
Click to expand...
The list of witnesses that Republicans provided to Democrats in the House Oversight Committee included people such as Alexandra Chalupa, who the Republicans wanted to call in order to push a de-bunked conspiracy theory from a Russian disinformation campaign and Hunter Biden who weren't really witnesses to the matter at hand The Republicans were trying to change the subject to unsupported conspiracy theories that Ukraine had interfered in the 2016 election and to the Bidens . Of course, the Democrats weren't going to allow that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: luthervol
#30,464
#30,464
volinbham said:
Thinking that base slanted districts would see primary challenges from more extreme candidates that might win a primary but be too nuts for the general.

Plus good ole Bloomberg came in with a campaign cash for votes scheme that balled Nancy out.
Click to expand...
I think you meant bailed (not balled)... Bloomburg has certainly loosened his purse strings.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1972 Grad
#30,466
#30,466
volinbham said:
Or the Dems could have allowed Republicans to call witnesses. Or Schiff could have released transcripts from all the witnesses that testified, not just the ones he felt supported the cause.

Nah, who am I kidding
Click to expand...
Wait. Rs were prevented from calling witnesses? Is that Constitutional?
 
#30,467
#30,467
BowlBrother85 said:
The list of witnesses that Republicans provided to Democrats in the House Oversight Committee included people such as Alexandra Chalupa, who the Republicans wanted to call in order to push a de-bunked conspiracy theory from a Russian disinformation campaign and Hunter Biden who weren't really witnesses to the matter at hand The Republicans were trying to change the subject to unsupported conspiracy theories that Ukraine had interfered in the 2016 election and to the Bidens . Of course, the Democrats weren't going to allow that.
Click to expand...
Hunter Biden is literally the center of this whole thing!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: volfanjustin
#30,468
#30,468
luthervol said:
Don't overlook the fact that Trump kept everyone with direct knowledge from testifying. It's critical.
Click to expand...

There's a Constitutional remedy for that. The Dems (who apparently are wholly devoted to the Constitution) not only chose not to pursue the Constitutional remedy but also decided to create an impeachment article about choosing not to do so. Cajones mas Grande
 
#30,470
#30,470
BowlBrother85 said:
The list of witnesses that Republicans provided to Democrats in the House Oversight Committee included people such as Alexandra Chalupa, who the Republicans wanted to call in order to push a de-bunked conspiracy theory from a Russian disinformation campaign and Hunter Biden who weren't really witnesses to the matter at hand The Republicans were trying to change the subject to unsupported conspiracy theories that Ukraine had interfered in the 2016 election and to the Bidens . Of course, the Democrats weren't going to allow that.
Click to expand...
Thankfully that bug eyed twerp or fat worthless high pants worthless POS now have no control over the process
 
#30,472
#30,472
volfanjustin said:
At least two people in your party do. The bi partisan support was against impeachment. MAGA KAG
Click to expand...

See. No matter which way the acquittal, they are going to claim the Repubs were partisan. They are already dismissing the Senate vote by calling them "spineless". It is no win. Motion to dismiss and then have the Senate or Barr appoint a Special Prosecutor into Ukraine.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tbwhhs and volfanjustin
#30,474
#30,474
BowlBrother85 said:
The list of witnesses that Republicans provided to Democrats in the House Oversight Committee included people such as Alexandra Chalupa, who the Republicans wanted to call in order to push a de-bunked conspiracy theory from a Russian disinformation campaign and Hunter Biden who weren't really witnesses to the matter at hand The Republicans were trying to change the subject to unsupported conspiracy theories that Ukraine had interfered in the 2016 election and to the Bidens . Of course, the Democrats weren't going to allow that.
Click to expand...
I had a couple of those tonight at Taco Bell in Panama City, Florida. Not bad.
 
  • Like
Reactions: McDad and Orange_Vol1321
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top