"If this shallow, hurried and wholly partisan impeachment were to succeed, it would rip the country apart, pouring gasoline on the fire of cultural divisions that already exist." "It would create the weapon of perpetual impeachment to be used against future presidents whenever the House of Representatives is of a different political party."
What a tone deaf statement. This country has already been ripped apart. And this is coming from a guy who represents a state that openly praises a grand wizard. Talk about divisive.
"If this shallow, hurried and wholly partisan impeachment were to succeed, it would rip the country apart, pouring gasoline on the fire of cultural divisions that already exist." "It would create the weapon of perpetual impeachment to be used against future presidents whenever the House of Representatives is of a different political party."
Lol ......dude it’s open season on U.S. politicians and their families now. Germany if you’re listening? Canada if you’re listening? France if you’re listening? Spain if you’re listening? England if you’re listening? Mexico if you’re listening? Japan if you’re listening? Is their anybody out there that can bring us more dirt on trump his wives and all his kids? And by the way, nepotism is back in the executive branch. The dems love this you know.
My advice is for the anti-Trump haters to gird their loins and prepare for another loss.
-He has Dementia...Doctor clears him. -He is a Traitor, Colluding with the Russians...Mueller exoneration. -He threatened Ukraine...Ukraine President says, "WHA???" -Quid Pro Quo...No. -Bribery...Bull. -He is starting WWIII in Iran...ho hum. -Impeachment... -Losers...oh yea!
He obviously isn’t on his rocker. Russia if you’re listening. He threatened the sitting US ambassador to the Ukraine. He shook down the Ukraine prez. This for that..yes Bribery wasn’t in question even though that’s basically what trump did. Iran issue is escalating day by day. And we have 100’s dead shot out of the sky and unnamed soldiers with dozens of unnamed injuries. Shhhhh deep state working ..it’s all good.
Odds are the GOPers can’t handle the truth. No Bolton. No Biden.
I'm convinced that Republicans never really wanted to have Biden testify... I think they know that it's a red herring designed to distract us from the facts..
You watch, today, the Senate will vote for NO WITNESSES. Quickly followed by a vote to dismiss.
Lamar Alexander has said he doesn't need to see anymore proof, the Dems have proven their case. He's voting for no witnesses. Yeah, you read that right, he said that the dems have proven their case, but he's voting no witnesses..
That's simply saying that he doesn't care.
Anyway, Trump will not be convicted so you watch, he's gonna tell the world that he was exonerated.
Odds are the GOPers can’t handle the truth. No Bolton. No Biden.
I'm convinced that Republicans never really wanted to have Biden testify... I think they know that it's a red herring designed to distract us from the facts..
You watch, today, the Senate will vote for NO WITNESSES. Quickly followed by a vote to dismiss.
Lamar Alexander has said he doesn't need to see anymore proof, the Dems have proven their case. He's voting for no witnesses. Yeah, you read that right, he said that the dems have proven their case, but he's voting no witnesses..
That's simply saying that he doesn't care.
Anyway, Trump will not be convicted so you watch, he's gonna tell the world that he was exonerated.
That isn't actually true, but he'll say it.
If the Dems proved their case. Why do they want more witnesses? Because this was nothing more than a political stunt to run against a President that has a booming economy and they have nothing more than Russia/Impeachment.
If the Dems proved their case. Why do they want more witnesses? Because this was nothing more than a political stunt to run against a President that has a booming economy and they have nothing more than Russia/Impeachment.
Maybe you should ask Republican senator Lamar Alexander. He said the Democrats did prove it. You still keep believing a man who lies to you consistently on a daily basis.
Quote:
Alexander said: “There is no need for more evidence to prove something that has already been proven and that does not meet the United States Constitution’s high bar for an impeachable offense. …The Constitution does not give the Senate the power to remove the president from office and ban him from this year’s ballot simply for actions that are inappropriate.”
So now it's official. Using congressional approved funds to bribe a foreign government into interfering with American elections is perfectly fine of a president does that. It's just "inappropriate".
Forever impeached with a Senate that was too scared of the truth to call witnesses. Period.
A Trump defense that said - even if he's guilty he can do anything he wants as long as it's in pursuit of him winning the next election and he is of the belief that is in the best interest of the Nation.... laughable.
Maybe you should ask Republican senator Lamar Alexander. He said the Democrats did prove it. You still keep believing a man who lies to you consistently on a daily basis.
And this is what's so sad. Trump straight up lies. He attacks the reputations of people and calls them liars, when they're telling the truth.
And this is deemed acceptable? Because they don't care about what he did (even though he lied by saying he didn't do it?) Because instead of wanting to get to the actual truth, we're held up since the process seemed unfair in the first place?
I don't care about the freaking process, i want to know the truth. Exactly what happened.
Quote:
So now it's official. Using congressional approved funds to bribe a foreign government into interfering with American elections is perfectly fine of a president does that. It's just "inappropriate".
Be careful what you wish for.
And you're absolutely correct. This is not a good prescedent to set. This behavior is absolutely unacceptable. So that's what's being figured. He did hold up foreign aid for political favors (yet lies about it to the American people over and over), and that's not a big enough deal to take this any further.
I just find it absolutely pathetic.
This is why i left the Republican Party right here. 100%.
Or maybe i should say, the Republican Party left me. When they sold out on caring about doing the right thing. About family values. Personal Responsibility. Morality. And got behind this scumbag garbage human of a President.
- He is also ACQUITTED FOREVER ... but u don’t like that so it doesn’t count ... - what happened in the senate was very unfair ... thank god the house ran a squeaky clean extremely fair process ... ...
And then u end it with something that is a bold faced lie the way u wrote it... at least your consistent ...
- He is also ACQUITTED FOREVER ... but u don’t like that so it doesn’t count ... - what happened in the senate was very unfair ... thank god the house ran a squeaky clean extremely fair process ... ...
And then u end it with something that is a bold faced lie the way u wrote it... at least your consistent ...
Yes he is impeached and acquitted forever. He can't be acquitted of impeachment without being impeached was my point. A very select group of POTUS club.
What happened in the Senate was a travesty and a sham. The Dems in the house didn't do anything like what the Senate did. Schiff spelled that out in answering Q's yesterday. If you have a beef with what they did be specific.
The Trump team ABSOLUTELY said that if Trump believed he was acting in the best interest of the Nation by insuring he was elected in the next election - then his motive couldn't be considered corrupt and his actions were un-impeachable. Sorry. 100% truth.
Talking of lying - you ready to fess up to referring to Trump in Football Talk when you said " the other Billionaire in PP" ??? Nahhh - you aren't man enough to admit that.
Maybe you should ask Republican senator Lamar Alexander. He said the Democrats did prove it. You still keep believing a man who lies to you consistently on a daily basis.
And this is what's so sad. Trump straight up lies. He attacks the reputations of people and calls them liars, when they're telling the truth.
And this is deemed acceptable? Because they don't care about what he did (even though he lied by saying he didn't do it?) Because instead of wanting to get to the actual truth, we're held up since the process seemed unfair in the first place?
I don't care about the freaking process, i want to know the truth. Exactly what happened.
Quote:
So now it's official. Using congressional approved funds to bribe a foreign government into interfering with American elections is perfectly fine of a president does that. It's just "inappropriate".
Be careful what you wish for.
And you're absolutely correct. This is not a good prescedent to set. This behavior is absolutely unacceptable. So that's what's being figured. He did hold up foreign aid for political favors (yet lies about it to the American people over and over), and that's not a big enough deal to take this any further.
Quotes from Tony Schwartz, the ACTUAL author of the book Art of the Deal...
“Lying is second nature to him,” Schwartz said. “More than anyone else I have ever met, Trump has the ability to convince himself that whatever he is saying at any given moment is true, or sort of true, or at least ought to be true.”
“Schwartz says of Trump, “He lied strategically. He had a complete lack of conscience about it.” Since most people are “constrained by the truth,” Trump’s indifference to it “gave him a strange advantage.” When challenged about the facts, Schwartz says, Trump would often double down, repeat himself, and grow belligerent.” “
"If this shallow, hurried and wholly partisan impeachment were to succeed, it would rip the country apart, pouring gasoline on the fire of cultural divisions that already exist." "It would create the weapon of perpetual impeachment to be used against future presidents whenever the House of Representatives is of a different political party."
“Given the partisan nature of this impeachment from the very beginning and throughout, I have come to the conclusion that there will be no fair trial in the Senate. I don’t believe the continuation of this process will change anything. It is sad for me to admit that, as an institution, the Congress has failed.”
-Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski (another swing vote gone)
Odds are the GOPers can’t handle the truth. No Bolton. No Biden.
I'm convinced that Republicans never really wanted to have Biden testify... I think they know that it's a red herring designed to distract us from the facts..
You watch, today, the Senate will vote for NO WITNESSES. Quickly followed by a vote to dismiss.
Lamar Alexander has said he doesn't need to see anymore proof, the Dems have proven their case. He's voting for no witnesses. Yeah, you read that right, he said that the dems have proven their case, but he's voting no witnesses..
That's simply saying that he doesn't care.
Anyway, Trump will not be convicted so you watch, he's gonna tell the world that he was exonerated.
That isn't actually true, but he'll say it.
If the Dems proved their case. Why do they want more witnesses? Because this was nothing more than a political stunt to run against a President that has a booming economy and they have nothing more than Russia/Impeachment.
Ever see a trial without witnesses?
I'll tell you way, it's the right and proper thing to do.
Why would Trump stop people from Testifying? Don't say it's national security, that can be dealt with properly to avoid openly discussing those things.. It's a false reason to avoid testifying.
I can't imagine any person accused of so many things not being willing to bring forth witnesses that will prove him innocent.
He doesn't want to prove he's innocent, he just wants to avoid being proven guilty... And those witnesses are aware.
But really it doesn't matter,, Republican senators have basically said, yeah, he did that, but we don't care.
"If this shallow, hurried and wholly partisan impeachment were to succeed, it would rip the country apart, pouring gasoline on the fire of cultural divisions that already exist." "It would create the weapon of perpetual impeachment to be used against future presidents whenever the House of Representatives is of a different political party."
“Given the partisan nature of this impeachment from the very beginning and throughout, I have come to the conclusion that there will be no fair trial in the Senate. I don’t believe the continuation of this process will change anything. It is sad for me to admit that, as an institution, the Congress has failed.”
-Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski (another swing vote gone)
Given the partisan nature of this coverup by the Republicans, I agree, it's a waste of time...
I live on a 2 way street unlike U and most others ...
I actually voted for Clinton twice ... i voted for bush once and couldn’t do it again ... i left the Republican Party during Rons 2nd term but voted for bush cause i wasn’t voting for that weenie from Mass ...
What they impeached Clinton for was BS .... and that man was and is a disgusting pig ... and that has nuttin to do with the fact I voted for him .... just like my thoughts on this one have nuttin to do with the fact i voted for and love the job Mr. Presidents doing ...
"There is no need for more evidence to conclude that the president withheld United States aid, at least in part, to pressure Ukraine to investigate the Bidens” because ‘the House managers have proved this with what they call a 'mountain of overwhelming evidence.’
It was inappropriate for the president to ask a foreign leader to investigate his political opponent and to withhold United States aid to encourage that investigation,” he says. “But the Constitution does not give the Senate the power to remove the president from office and ban him from this year’s ballot simply for actions that are inappropriate.”
Lamar Alexander. Republican senator from Tennessee.
All you have to do now is convince yourself that bribing a foreign power to interfere with our elections isn't an impeachable offense. And just remember this in the future when a corrupt democrat does the same thing. Because now that Republicans have said a president can do it, they'll continue to do it.
I actually voted for a Republican gov. in both Ohio when I lived there and one here in Tennessee.
The problem with Trump is he is a classless buffoon that lies like a teenager. If his mouth is open he's lying. He sounds like a school yard bully and punishes anyone who says anything negative against him. He will publicly attack veterans, gold star families, a disabled reporter and even a teenager who disagrees with him. He's a disgrace.
Here's another place we differ. Bill Clinton committed perjury. He deserved to be impeached. Just like trump did.
Bafoon - anyone that thins that needs to look in the mirror ... for real ...
If his mouth is open he’s lying ... as opposed to the other politicians ... one way street bro ...
Some things he didn’t lie about and he said them with his mouth open and all ...
- new, much better trade deals .... trade deals were one of the reasons i left the Republican Party during Ron’s 2nd term and its the one big blemish on Clinton’s record IMO ... - manufacturing jobs coming back ... - getting out of the Paris hose America climate accord .. - Getting out of that BS Iran nuclear deal ... - building the wall .... - if McCain didn’t hate him more than he loves this country O care would be history ...
The list of campaign promises he kept is long ... a lot longer than that .... so he doesn’t lie every time his mouth is open ... *L* ...
Ya ... i do ... and i been paying attention to trade deals and pretty much anything to do with business for a LONG LONG TIME ....
He’s been president for over 5 months .... .. . U wanna chat with me do it respectfully and I’ll respond in kind ... u wanna talk to me like I’m a 2 year old ... don’t expect me to reply ... save it for someone else ...
Fully aware of how much new walls been built despite him fighting one entire party and some of his own who all want cheap labor ...
U ever see the old wall? ... I didn’t think so ...
Nuttin wrong with the Iran deal .. ... lets leave it at we disagree ...
He’s either kept his word on his campaign promises or tried like hell ...
I’m not a dolt ... i knew Mexico was never gonna pay for the wall ... u believed that ... ... that may be the only campaign promise he didn’t try real hard to keep ... *L* ...
Odds are the GOPers can’t handle the truth. No Bolton. No Biden.
I'm convinced that Republicans never really wanted to have Biden testify... I think they know that it's a red herring designed to distract us from the facts..
You watch, today, the Senate will vote for NO WITNESSES. Quickly followed by a vote to dismiss.
Lamar Alexander has said he doesn't need to see anymore proof, the Dems have proven their case. He's voting for no witnesses. Yeah, you read that right, he said that the dems have proven their case, but he's voting no witnesses..
That's simply saying that he doesn't care.
Anyway, Trump will not be convicted so you watch, he's gonna tell the world that he was exonerated.
That isn't actually true, but he'll say it.
If the Dems proved their case. Why do they want more witnesses? Because this was nothing more than a political stunt to run against a President that has a booming economy and they have nothing more than Russia/Impeachment.
They did prove their case to any reasonable person willing to listen and pay attention without preconceived notions. The Republicans in Congress are anything but that.
Senate rejects impeachment witnesses, setting up Trump acquittal
Senate Republicans rejected a mid-trial effort to call witnesses and documents on Friday, paving the way for President Trump’s acquittal on two articles of impeachment passed by the House.
The dems had bipartisan support for witnesses. This proves the trial was a sham, Trump and McConnell rigged it. 70% + wanted to see witnesses called. So, 40, this is FAR from over bro. They may acquit him tonight or next week, but this is very very bad for GPers.
"At a time when large majorities of Americans have lost faith in government, does the fact that the chief justice is presiding over an impeachment trial in which Republican senators have thus far refused to allow witnesses or evidence contribute to the loss of legitimacy of the chief justice, the Supreme Court, and the Constitution?" Roberts read from the card on which Warren wrote her question.
Warren maybe the least qualified person for the Presidency in the history of our republic.
Odds are the GOPers can’t handle the truth. No Bolton. No Biden.
I'm convinced that Republicans never really wanted to have Biden testify... I think they know that it's a red herring designed to distract us from the facts..
You watch, today, the Senate will vote for NO WITNESSES. Quickly followed by a vote to dismiss.
Lamar Alexander has said he doesn't need to see anymore proof, the Dems have proven their case. He's voting for no witnesses. Yeah, you read that right, he said that the dems have proven their case, but he's voting no witnesses..
That's simply saying that he doesn't care.
Anyway, Trump will not be convicted so you watch, he's gonna tell the world that he was exonerated.
That isn't actually true, but he'll say it.
If the Dems proved their case. Why do they want more witnesses? Because this was nothing more than a political stunt to run against a President that has a booming economy and they have nothing more than Russia/Impeachment.
Ever see a trial without witnesses?
I'll tell you way, it's the right and proper thing to do.
Why would Trump stop people from Testifying? Don't say it's national security, that can be dealt with properly to avoid openly discussing those things.. It's a false reason to avoid testifying.
I can't imagine any person accused of so many things not being willing to bring forth witnesses that will prove him innocent.
He doesn't want to prove he's innocent, he just wants to avoid being proven guilty... And those witnesses are aware.
But really it doesn't matter,, Republican senators have basically said, yeah, he did that, but we don't care.
Maybe the Republicans are sick of fooling around with spoiled children.
They haven't seemed to tire of trump yet. Epic fail, Dooty
It may say Impeached but will always be known as Democrats Temper Tantrum. You guys might have ruined your party forever.
You are clueless too. That blue tsunami headed your way in November will prove it too. You think the left was mad and fired up before, you ain't seen nothing yet.
They haven't seemed to tire of trump yet. Epic fail, Dooty
It may say Impeached but will always be known as Democrats Temper Tantrum. You guys might have ruined your party forever.
You are clueless too. That blue tsunami headed your way in November will prove it too. You think the left was mad and fired up before, you ain't seen nothing yet.
The Dems keep screaming there was no witnesses. They had 17 witnesses in the House. They could have used a subpoena to have more witnesses in the house but they did not. Why? Then they would not be able to cry unfair trail. This was political when it started and is political when it ends on Wednesday.
What was unfair is President Trump was not given due process in the House. There were zero Republican witnesses admitted by Schiff during the House Impeachment. Why? It was a sham to begin with.
If they were serious about removal then they should have been transparent. The Whistle blower should have testified in the House, Why was he not called? It would have exposed Adan Schiff as corrupt. He would have certainly been called as a witness in the Senate. It would have also exposed not just Biden but John Kerry as corrupt.
The do nothing, soon to be socialist Democrats have nothing to run on in 2020. They could not run against the economy so they had to have the bogus impeachment to hope it fires up their base and not just the progressive extremists. Once they go full on Socialist Trump will win 2020 in a landslide electoral college victory much larger than the decisive 77 point victory in 2016.
CNN legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin: 'Trump won' and 'that's how history will remember' this impeachment
CNN chief legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin declared President Trump the winner of the impeachment trial after the Senate failed to pass a motion to call for additional witnesses.
Did Ukraine receive the aid in question? Was it timely? Did Ukraine ever announce an investigation of Biden? Did Ukraine ever investigate Biden? Did the Ukrainian President comment on the aide "restrictions"? This whole thing is ridiculous.
Do you know why there can be no acquittal? Look up the definition of the word. Here it is: a judgment that a person is not guilty of the crime with which the person has been charged. Trump hasn't been charged with a crime.
What a hoax/circus/witch-hunt cluster.
The best part of this joke is that the TDS haters desperately tried to make up a QPQ on Trump that did not exist after seeing an actual QPQ delivered to Russia on the hot-mike moment of King O. Trump gave Ukraine $$$ to stop Russia...Obama made a promise to be more-flexible with Russia if they'll just wait until after the election. Yet Trump is the one in Putin's palm.
Bested only by Hillary being found guilty of committing espionage...then a crooked FBI director - who was commenting above his pay grade - stating that she can't be tried for the very obvious crime she committed. Uh...yes she can...if the DOJ weren't so busy trying to stop Trump and protect Clinton and Obama himself.
Real crimes get the ho-hum...made-for-TV BS is cause for uproar and why the country is being torn apart. TDS is real.
Did Ukraine receive the aid in question? Was it timely? Did Ukraine ever announce an investigation of Biden? Did Ukraine ever investigate Biden? Did the Ukrainian President comment on the aide "restrictions"? This whole thing is ridiculous.
Do you know why there can be no acquittal? Look up the definition of the word. Here it is: a judgment that a person is not guilty of the crime with which the person has been charged. Trump hasn't been charged with a crime.
What a hoax/circus/witch-hunt cluster.
The best part of this joke is that the TDS haters desperately tried to make up a QPQ on Trump that did not exist after seeing an actual QPQ delivered to Russia on the hot-mike moment of King O. Trump gave Ukraine $$$ to stop Russia...Obama made a promise to be more-flexible with Russia if they'll just wait until after the election. Yet Trump is the one in Putin's palm.
Bested only by Hillary being found guilty of committing espionage...then a crooked FBI director - who was commenting above his pay grade - stating that she can't be tried for the very obvious crime she committed. Uh...yes she can...if the DOJ weren't so busy trying to stop Trump and protect Clinton and Obama himself.
Real crimes get the ho-hum...made-for-TV BS is cause for uproar and why the country is being torn apart. TDS is real.
Did Ukraine receive the aid in question? Was it timely? Did Ukraine ever announce an investigation of Biden? Did Ukraine ever investigate Biden? Did the Ukrainian President comment on the aide "restrictions"?
The request and the attempt to force Ukraine to do something to receive the monies was what made this wrong. The fact that it was politically motivated with the intent to undermine Trump's political opponent is what made it impeachable. Those are the facts. Because Ukraine got the funds does not mean the offenses did not take place.
And Trumps' defense bore that out. It went from [1] no coercion / no quid pro quo. . . . to [2] process process process [3] the GOP didn't have access to the witnesses (yes they did) [4] no-one heard it from the President's lips .... to [5] yeah, well even if we know people will testify to Trump requesting quid pro quo and they heard it from Trump directly & we know it's wrong and dirty it doesn't rise to the level of impeachment. [6] The Trump defense even went so far as to claim if Trump felt he was acting in the Nation's best interest - he could basically do anything to get re-elected and it wouldn't be impeachable.
We have at least 2 Republican Senators saying that - yes he's guilty but because of the TIMING and this being an election year, we won't vote to impeach.
And Trump and the Trump stooges will claim this exonerates him !
All that's happened is a ridiculously dangerous precedent has been established and without doubt at some point in the future a crooked POTUS will use this as a defense to hide his actions. Oh and lets not forget the other precedent - where Congress and oversight of the POTUS has been neutered - future POTUS can simply never comply with anything out of the House ever again.
His argument seemed unbelievable: as long as the President thinks his reëlection will benefit the country, he can do anything in pursuit of it without fear of impeachment.
They tried to walk it back and claim that's not what they said ... I happened to be listening live and it's exactly what he said.
Did Ukraine receive the aid in question? YUPPERS Was it timely? pretty much Did Ukraine ever announce an investigation of Biden? No Sir Did Ukraine ever investigate Biden? not to our knowledge Did the Ukrainian President comment on the aide "restrictions"? NO ... unless u wanna talk about him saying he had no clue the money was even withheld much less felt any pressure for something he didn’t know was going on
NOT THAT ANY OF THIS MATTER TO US WEAKMINDED FOLK ...
Do you know why there can be no acquittal? Look up the definition of the word. Here it is: a judgment that a person is not guilty of the crime with which the person has been charged. Trump hasn't been charged with a crime.
What a hoax/circus/witch-hunt cluster.
The best part of this joke is that the TDS haters desperately tried to make up a QPQ on Trump that did not exist after seeing an actual QPQ delivered to Russia on the hot-mike moment of King O. Trump gave Ukraine $$$ to stop Russia...Obama made a promise to be more-flexible with Russia if they'll just wait until after the election. Yet Trump is the one in Putin's palm.
Bested only by Hillary being found guilty of committing espionage...then a crooked FBI director - who was commenting above his pay grade - stating that she can't be tried for the very obvious crime she committed. Uh...yes she can...if the DOJ weren't so busy trying to stop Trump and protect Clinton and Obama himself.
Real crimes get the ho-hum...made-for-TV BS is cause for uproar and why the country is being torn apart. TDS is real.
This has nothing to do with the fact Schiff said for 2 years there was proof of Russian collusion and we’d see it soon ..... tick tock .... Nadler didn’t have much egg on his face ... did he? ...
0 - 2 .... what’s next from the charade of a party who only has one thing in mind ... if he wins again he may be impeached as many times as the rest in our history combined ....
What does it tell you when the dems are saying Trump would be impeached before he was even elected? I’m sure the libtards have plenty of answers...as always
What does it tell you when the dems are saying Trump would be impeached before he was even elected? I’m sure the libtards have plenty of answers...as always
So...Ukraine received the aid...received it timely...did not announce or perform an investigation...and the President of Ukraine said there was no pressure. Facts.
There's no case here. There is no crime charged to be "guilty" of. This thing is a joke. The hand-wringing and astonishment is over a disagreement in policy...that's a poor reason to impeach a President. Fantasy.
I'm disappointed that we aren't getting to hear witnesses. Especially given the first paragraph in this post. Quid Pro Joe is sighing relief with every breath today...for now.
So...Ukraine received the aid...received it timely...did not announce or perform an investigation...and the President of Ukraine said there was no pressure. Facts.
There's no case here. There is no crime charged to be "guilty" of. This thing is a joke. The hand-wringing and astonishment is over a disagreement in policy...that's a poor reason to impeach a President. Fantasy.
I'm disappointed that we aren't getting to hear witnesses. Especially given the first paragraph in this post. Quid Pro Joe is sighing relief with every breath today...for now.
You are wrong. But hey - no skin off my nose. As I said - the fact they got the money-the fact that it may or may not have been on time - what Ukraine says (when they are still reliant on our aide and support and good will 100%) is irrelevant. Not succeeding in an attempted coercion doesn't mean that the attempt wasn't made. We have witnesses out the ying yang that said that was the case ... the defense was "no-one heard Trump say it" .... Then Bolton finally stepped in and verified. You are trying to ignore facts by stating another set of facts implying one rules out the other ---- that doesn't happen. The FACT that Ukraine got the funds does NOT mean that Trump didn't put them on hold with the threat of not releasing them unless Biden(s) was investigate (actually the investigation wasn't needed - just an announcement) ... the fact that the money was released AFTER the whistle blower made this an issue does not exonerate him.
The fact that you think Biden should be a witness to a trial about what Trump did shows you have brainwashed by the Right Faux News media. We are good. Keep believing whatever you want to believe. . . . I asked the other day what Biden could testify to about the call, the coercion and about Trump's actions ... I got crickets.
If Biden is guilty of anything (and it's been debunked) but if he is guilty of anything... investigate him and prosecute him fully. But that has NOTHING to do with Trump's trial. Thinking otherwise shows the extent and influence of faux news.
Fully aware of how much new walls been built despite him fighting one entire party and some of his own who all want cheap labor ...
U ever see the old wall? ... I didn’t think so ...
Nuttin wrong with the Iran deal .. ... lets leave it at we disagree ...
He’s either kept his word on his campaign promises or tried like hell ...
I’m not a dolt ... i knew Mexico was never gonna pay for the wall ... u believed that ... ... that may be the only campaign promise he didn’t try real hard to keep ... *L* ...
I wasn't aware that we got the check from Mexico to pay for the wall... what's that you say? we didn't get a check...
We can root for the same football team, yet that doesn’t excuse me from calling you out using demeaning insults towards people based on physical, developmental, or characteristics. Mind you, you use these insults as a way to demean these people, and this actually reinforces poor beliefs about those who have disabilities.
Like I told you in the other thread, this place isn’t Stormfront. Take your crap to Stormfront where it belongs.
So...Ukraine received the aid...received it timely...did not announce or perform an investigation...and the President of Ukraine said there was no pressure. Facts.
There's no case here. There is no crime charged to be "guilty" of. This thing is a joke. The hand-wringing and astonishment is over a disagreement in policy...that's a poor reason to impeach a President. Fantasy.
I'm disappointed that we aren't getting to hear witnesses. Especially given the first paragraph in this post. Quid Pro Joe is sighing relief with every breath today...for now.
You are wrong. But hey - no skin off my nose. As I said - the fact they got the money-the fact that it may or may not have been on time - what Ukraine says (when they are still reliant on our aide and support and good will 100%) is irrelevant. Not succeeding in an attempted coercion doesn't mean that the attempt wasn't made. We have witnesses out the ying yang that said that was the case ... the defense was "no-one heard Trump say it" .... Then Bolton finally stepped in and verified. You are trying to ignore facts by stating another set of facts implying one rules out the other ---- that doesn't happen. The FACT that Ukraine got the funds does NOT mean that Trump didn't put them on hold with the threat of not releasing them unless Biden(s) was investigate (actually the investigation wasn't needed - just an announcement) ... the fact that the money was released AFTER the whistle blower made this an issue does not exonerate him.
The fact that you think Biden should be a witness to a trial about what Trump did shows you have brainwashed by the Right Faux News media. We are good. Keep believing whatever you want to believe. . . . I asked the other day what Biden could testify to about the call, the coercion and about Trump's actions ... I got crickets.
If Biden is guilty of anything (and it's been debunked) but if he is guilty of anything... investigate him and prosecute him fully. But that has NOTHING to do with Trump's trial. Thinking otherwise shows the extent and influence of faux news.
Ok...so no crime charged...and the Ukrainians got what we were to give them without any favors being exchanged. That's what actually happened. The rest is fluff.
I don't want Biden to testify in a trial about Trump...I just want the sleaze investigated...however that comes about. Why would the R's want Biden testify in the witch hunt? To embarrass him...just like the whole witch hunt is/was designed to embarrass Trump.
Trump did commit a crime. He broke the law holding up the funds. Trump did abuse his powers of office by leveraging said funds for political advantage. Trump is guilty of an impeachable offense, even top republicans have stated so. So what is really happening is the the Senate republicans are afraid of backlash from the deplorables and Trump tweets. Trump is a crook with an unlimited get out of jail free card now. This is really something to celebrate. Shame on any of you that still support this man. Shame.
Adding “tard” to the end of words or labeling someone a “midget” does much unintended harm. I encourage you research the history of IDEA and the ADA.
Good point. Why doesn't it go both ways though?
Why is calling someone a name only bad when it's a position you don't support?
I, and pretty much everyone on here that voted for Trump has been called a racist, a xenophobe, a hater, people that endorse cheating on spouses, anti Christian, white supremacists, and much more.
I personally have been called a backwoods .......well, let's just a lot worse. Redneck. Ignorant. My wife has even been brought into some one calling me names.
Trump uses names to belittle others, and the libs on here call him out for it. Then they turn around and do the exact same things.
I’m not a dolt ... i knew Mexico was never gonna pay for the wall ... u believed that ... ... that may be the only campaign promise he didn’t try real hard to keep ... *L* ...
Not hardly but you would deny every one of them I pointed out. And no, I never believed half of what he said. Those were the tens of thousands of people at his rally's chanting Mexico was going to pay for it.
What happened to his healthcare plan he was going to roll out in less than 90 days?
"If I'm elected president, I will push for a constitutional amendment to impose term limits on all members of Congress."
“I would bring back waterboarding, and I’d bring back a hell of a lot worse than waterboarding,”
"Allow individuals to fully deduct health insurance premium payments from their tax returns under the current tax system."
"We will end the sanctuary cities that have resulted in so many needless deaths. Cities that refuse to cooperate with federal authorities will not receive taxpayer dollars, and we will work with Congress to pass legislation to protect those jurisdictions that do assist federal authorities.”
“I'm putting the people on notice that are coming here from Syria, as part of this mass migration, that if I win, if I win, they're going back.”
"We’ve got to get rid of the $19 trillion in debt. ... Well, I would say over a period of eight years. And I’ll tell you why.”
“The events never happened. Never. All of these liars will be sued after the election is over.”
“I’m under a routine audit and it'll be released, and as soon as the audit is finished it will be released."
"It can be done. ... It will take place and it will go relatively quickly. ... If you have the right people, like, in the agencies and the various people that do the balancing ... you can cut the numbers by two pennies and three pennies and balance a budget quickly and have a stronger and better country."
"President Obama wants to change the name of Mt. McKinley to Denali after more than 100 years. Great insult to Ohio. I will change back!"
"As an example of the power structure I'm fighting, AT&T is buying Time Warner and thus CNN, a deal we will not approve in my administration because it's too much concentration of power in the hands of too few."
Democrats are not going to stop. It should bother people that all of these scandals are related. Think about it. Don't you find it a little odd that the same people are involved in spygate, collusiongate, Muellergate, and this Ukraine impeachment circus?
Can't wait to see what Fake Scandal they come up with next.
Democrats are not going to stop. It should bother people that all of these scandals are related. Think about it. Don't you find it a little odd that the same people are involved in spygate, collusiongate, Muellergate, and this Ukraine impeachment circus?
Can't wait to see what Fake Scandal they come up with next.
Didn't seem to bother you much when they did the same thing to Hillary.
The difference is seven people around the Hillary investigations weren't found guilty of anything in a court of law and nobody was even indicted.
You seem to find it odd that when people keep finding criminals that they keep looking for them.
Thats what I think too. They'll find some old girl who will say she was raped 50 years ago.
All the lefties will believe her. Not really but will say they do. These are the same guys that don't believe the woman that said Kobe raped her.
Where have you been? There's already 19 of them and nobody cares. Even when a man says he can grab women by the ..... Even when he pays off a porn star and a playboy bunny. Even when he cheats on all three of his wives. Nobody cares what he has or hasn't done to women......
List of Trump's accusers and their allegations of sexual misconduct
And the Libs talk about interfering with elections? Comical.
Trump and the Republicans are going to steamroll the election in Nov.
yay, team.
You should put on a pleated skirt and wave you pom poms right next to 40anne. Saddle shoes would look nice of the both of you.
pffft.
Well, I am disappointed you said that. Really.
I don't care who you vote for. You know who I will vote for.
I always had you figured for a level headed sort of fellow. I am not saying that because you disagree with me. Nothing wrong with disagreement.
I am disappointed because I try to be a Gentleman and thought you were as well.
I don't care if you disagree, but seriously.....what?
You hurt my heart. I thought you were one I could at least have a rational conversation, be it in disagreement or agreement...Really Clem, you put a frown on my face.
Didn't seem to bother you much when they did the same thing to Hillary.
The difference is seven people around the Hillary investigations weren't found guilty of anything in a court of law and nobody was even indicted.
Anyone with even a lick of understanding of how classified email works knows that Hillary committed a crime...many crimes actually. The fact that a corrupt DOJ/FBI (under King O's direction) elected to look the other way does not mean she suddenly DIDN'T commit the crimes that she did. Remember...O.J. was found not guilty.
You look the other way when a crime is right in front of you...and try desperately to connect dots to an other act in hopes you can create/find a crime. So typical...you should go intern under your boy Adam.
I think what Hilary did was wrong and she lied and lied and lied about it and never owned it. She also had all the info wiped ... But she was cleared of any wrong doing based on intent. But I would not use her as a bastion of virtue no matter who tainted Trump is.
Trump - did it. Mueller sited multiple instances of obstruction of justice ... and with Ukraine, every man and his brother accepts Trump tried to bribe/coerce/force Ukraine into investigating Biden for political gain - he "got off" because some R's argued that the abuse of power doesn't rise to the level of impeachment - others said he was guilty but because of the timing (election year) it wasn't the right thing to do to impeach ... That's FACT ... And all the the Trump faithful do is have their head in the sand and simply deny. Pretty straight forward.
But the real truth is its time to stop wetting the bed over Trump and rejoin America again.
Spread the word.
LOL.... wetting the bed over a obstruction of justice and abuse of power that doesn't rise to the level of impeachment by the Spineless GOP Senate? Little things like that. You are willfully blind.
If Obama had done 10% of the Bat Chit crazy and illegal stuff Trump has - y'all would have been frothing at the mouth and he'd have been impeached multiple times.
I don't care who you vote for. You know who I will vote for.
I always had you figured for a level headed sort of fellow. I am not saying that because you disagree with me. Nothing wrong with disagreement.
I am disappointed because I try to be a Gentleman and thought you were as well.
I don't care if you disagree, but seriously.....what?
You hurt my heart. I thought you were one I could at least have a rational conversation, be it in disagreement or agreement...Really Clem, you put a frown on my face
Your opinion of me as a level-headed fellow is based upon more than a decade of civil, temperate conversations between the two of us. I'm a 'tone matcher.'
To my eyes, your post carried the same tone as posters like Dawg Duty and 40YEARSWAITING. Ask them if I'm a level-headed fellow. Their milage with me has been very different than yours.
Imagine my surprise and disappointment when I read a post by you written in a tone that I'd always considered beneath you, as well.
I responded in like fashion. Proportional response. When you go back to posting like 'peen, I'll stop addressing you like you're one of our resident Trumphumpers.
That was a pretty foolish thing to say. He would never sell them Alaska. There's too much oil there. He might sell them California if he can find it on a map.
Its King John ... u could at least get your criticism correct ...
He brought in more talent in two years than all the gms combined before him ... he brought us talent level wise from the laughing stock of the league to a tam with enough talent to turn everyone’s head ...
Thank god the talent he brought in is still here .... i hope your peeps don’t mess it up ..
Wonder if this will get deleted cause its in the wrong forum ... *L* ...
Hey 40...I’ve learned that speaking the truth on here may get you banished forever!
Yes - the site is run by Left wing communists and they will not tolerate the truth. I am certain you are either not responsible for what you wrote or that it was simply a truth that the commies couldn't stomach.
Hey 40...I’ve learned that speaking the truth on here may get you banished forever!
Yes - the site is run by Left wing communists and they will not tolerate the truth. I am certain you are either not responsible for what you wrote or that it was simply a truth that the commies couldn't stomach.
Are you suggesting you don't know of any Obama's economic successes?
Yes, he didn't do much. I remember companies moving out because of regulations and taxes. I remember minorites struggle. Are you going to tell us he helped Race relations. What about paying off countries like Iran to like us? How did that work out? I could go on but I don't want too. Please don't send out some BS graph or story written by some Liberal moran..You guys do enough of that.
He just won his last election. A lot of republican senators have agreed Trump did what he was accused of. Try and keep up. You'll have to come up with nasty things to say about all of them.
He didn't run against trump. He didn't lose to trump and had no reason to be an "angry loser" to Trump.
You yourself admit that he was the GOP nominee in 2012. Which either means the GOP was liberal until they ran a hate monger like trump or you're wrong.
If Romney had a real pair, he'd throw his hat in the ring for president on the dem ticket. Then he could take on Trump directly and let the country choose the best for the job.
Even if true, why were there no witnesses? If it's wasn't true, what could it hurt? Since when can a trial be voted to not allow witnesses?
That was the lower houses job. The only thing the Senate has to do is consider what Congress sends them. Congress presents the charges, the Senate tries the case based on the charges presented.. They don't have to call a witness.
Even if true, why were there no witnesses? If it's wasn't true, what could it hurt? Since when can a trial be voted to not allow witnesses?
The House called 17 witnesses all Democrat witnesses. The Republicans were denied witnesses by the House. So the trail had many witnesses. All that and not enough evidence to make their case. They had to ask for more witnesses to attempt to make their case. The House could have used a subpoena to have the witnesses they wanted. They knew they had no case. They knew what the Senate would do. They thought crying about unfair and no witnesses would help them politically. The American people are not as dumb as they think. Forever acquitted.
Even if true, why were there no witnesses? If it's wasn't true, what could it hurt? Since when can a trial be voted to not allow witnesses?
The House called 17 witnesses all Democrat witnesses. The Republicans were denied witnesses by the House. So the trail had many witnesses. All that and not enough evidence to make their case. They had to ask for more witnesses to attempt to make their case. The House could have used a subpoena to have the witnesses they wanted. They knew they had no case. They knew what the Senate would do. They thought crying about unfair and no witnesses would help them politically. The American people are not as dumb as they think. Forever acquitted.
The White House blocked subpoenaed witnesses. That's the point. And since when can any trial vote on witnesses? The Senate voted when they were then to vote on guilt.
This will prove in the future that no sitting president with the Senate majority will ever be convicted of anything, no matter the evidence.
Even if true, why were there no witnesses? If it's wasn't true, what could it hurt? Since when can a trial be voted to not allow witnesses?
The House called 17 witnesses all Democrat witnesses. The Republicans were denied witnesses by the House. So the trail had many witnesses. All that and not enough evidence to make their case. They had to ask for more witnesses to attempt to make their case. The House could have used a subpoena to have the witnesses they wanted. They knew they had no case. They knew what the Senate would do. They thought crying about unfair and no witnesses would help them politically. The American people are not as dumb as they think. Forever acquitted.
The White House blocked subpoenaed witnesses. That's the point. And since when can any trial vote on witnesses? The Senate voted when they were then to vote on guilt.
This will prove in the future that no sitting president with the Senate majority will ever be convicted of anything, no matter the evidence.
No they did not block a subpoena. The Dems never attempted a subpoena. They just threatened to.
The White House blocked subpoenaed witnesses. That's the point. And since when can any trial vote on witnesses? The Senate voted when they were then to vote on guilt.
Under the Constitution the President has the right to claim Executive Privileged and not release documents or honor House subpoenas.
The House can then challenge him in Court, which they decided not to.
This will prove in the future that no sitting president with the Senate majority will ever be convicted of anything, no matter the evidence.
The White House blocked subpoenaed witnesses. That's the point. And since when can any trial vote on witnesses? The Senate voted when they were then to vote on guilt.
Under the Constitution the President has the right to claim Executive Privileged and not release documents or honor House subpoenas.
The House can then challenge him in Court, which they decided not to.
This will prove in the future that no sitting president with the Senate majority will ever be convicted of anything, no matter the evidence.
Yea, you guys really blew it.
FYi, executive privilege is not in the constitution. It was a creation of George Washington and even he stated that it would not apply in an impeachment investigation.
The White House blocked subpoenaed witnesses. That's the point. And since when can any trial vote on witnesses? The Senate voted when they were then to vote on guilt.
Under the Constitution the President has the right to claim Executive Privileged and not release documents or honor House subpoenas.
The House can then challenge him in Court, which they decided not to.
This will prove in the future that no sitting president with the Senate majority will ever be convicted of anything, no matter the evidence.
Yea, you guys really blew it.
FYi, executive privilege is not in the constitution. It was a creation of George Washington and even he stated that it would not apply in an impeachment investigation.
However, the Supreme Court of the United States has ruled that executive privilege and congressional oversight each are a consequence of the doctrine of the separation of powers, derived from the supremacy of each branch in its own area of Constitutional activity.
The White House blocked subpoenaed witnesses. That's the point. And since when can any trial vote on witnesses? The Senate voted when they were then to vote on guilt.
Under the Constitution the President has the right to claim Executive Privileged and not release documents or honor House subpoenas.
The House can then challenge him in Court, which they decided not to.
This will prove in the future that no sitting president with the Senate majority will ever be convicted of anything, no matter the evidence.
Yea, you guys really blew it.
They blew it big time and everybody knows it. Their party is in shambles right now. They don't have any viable candidates for the 2020 election, this was their last chance to pull out all the stops. They needed to remove Trump from office because they knew they couldn't actually beat him.
This is a Trump victory lap all the way. The state of the union speech and today's acquittal news sets things up for a MAJOR Trump win!
Also for our Democrat friends, I'd like to know in advance, what do y'all got up your sleeves for next time around? LOL!
Feel free to twist things as you please. But it is not in the Constitution. The Supreme Court also ruled in the Nixon impeachment that executive privilege cannot be used in an impeachment inquiry
The White House blocked subpoenaed witnesses. That's the point. And since when can any trial vote on witnesses? The Senate voted when they were then to vote on guilt.
Under the Constitution the President has the right to claim Executive Privileged and not release documents or honor House subpoenas.
The House can then challenge him in Court, which they decided not to.
This will prove in the future that no sitting president with the Senate majority will ever be convicted of anything, no matter the evidence.
Yea, you guys really blew it.
They blew it big time and everybody knows it. Their party is in shambles right now. They don't have any viable candidates for the 2020 election, this was their last chance to pull out all the stops. They needed to remove Trump from office because they knew they couldn't actually beat him.
This is a Trump victory lap all the way. The state of the union speech and today's acquittal news sets things up for a MAJOR Trump win!
Also for our Democrat friends, I'd like to know in advance, what do y'all got up your sleeves for next time around? LOL!
Don't underestimate the Derangement of the Democrats in the House. There are still 9 months left to try for another impeachment.
Feel free to twist things as you please. But it is not in the Constitution. The Supreme Court also ruled in the Nixon impeachment that executive privilege cannot be used in an impeachment inquiry
You just witnessed it being used in an impeachment but the Dems did not take it to the Courts. So your argument is invalid.
That is just a ridiculous statement. Must have learned that from Trump. Don't like what you hear? Call it invalid, a hoax, or a sham. Regardless of what you call it, that doesn't change the facts
And if what Day of the Dawg said is correct, and I think he is, the Dems never even issued a subpoena.
They issued multiple subpoenas - they issued them and they were ignored. The same subpoena were valid before and after the investigation was officially opened and were likewise ignored before and after the investigation was opened.
Republicans are no longer denying that Trump did something wrong
Nebraska Sen. Ben Sasse told reporters last week that Alexander’s thinking speaks to the position of many Republican senators. “Let me be clear: Lamar speaks for lots and lots of us,” Sasse said.
Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) even went one step further, saying the president’s actions were impeachable, that he was guilty of the charges, but that he shouldn’t be removed. “Just because actions meet a standard of impeachment does not mean it is in the best interest of the country to remove a president from office,” read a Rubio statement released Friday.
Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) even went one step further, saying the president’s actions were impeachable, that he was guilty of the charges, but that he shouldn’t be removed. “Just because actions meet a standard of impeachment does not mean it is in the best interest of the country to remove a president from office,” read a Rubio statement released Friday.
Granted, there's a handful of things I clearly don't understand about the impeachment process (or at least this iteration), but this totally baffling.
I say burn the whole thing (our current govt) down and sort it out from there.
I say burn the whole thing (our current govt) down and sort it out from there.
And you know, I agree with you in theory. But here's where the problem comes in. That's what people claimed they were doing when they helped elect Trump.
Look what that moron has done. Be careful what you wish for.
Interesting the affect Mr. President has on people .... TDS has them now saying someone who was on Epstien’s jet and stood on his island multiple times is smart ....
I say burn the whole thing (our current govt) down and sort it out from there.
And you know, I agree with you in theory. But here's where the problem comes in. That's what people claimed they were doing when they helped elect Trump.
Look what that moron has done. Be careful what you wish for.
I see the rapid demise of our republic. I fear we are going to see many President impeached as we move forward.
Any time you have a angry mob in the majority of the lower house, such as we see today, Presidents will be called on the carpet regularly.
What President Trump might have done or did is no worse that what Presidents have done for 150 years. Didn't President Obama get caught spying on the Trump campaign? He also used the IRS to target GOP members.
My point is this latest round of democrats are angry people. I hope some more level minded people begin to take hold on that side of the aisle..
Any time senators of your own party admitted that a president tried to get a foreign government to interfere by investigating one of his political opponents your latest comments are meaningless.
Even his own party admits he's guilty. Somehow they just can't figure out that asking foreign governments to interfere in our elections is that serious.
Any time senators of your own party admitted that a president tried to get a foreign government to interfere by investigating one of his political opponents your latest comments are meaningless.
Even his own party admits he's guilty. Somehow they just can't figure out that asking foreign governments to interfere in our elections is that serious.
My words aren't meaningless. It has to be impeachable. I don't think it was. There were some shady dealing with Biden and his son. I don't think Biden is a spy, but it was clearly worth a look. The President has the authority to do that.
Carry on, I understand you and others are part of the angry mob I was talking about.
Just understand that Pandora's Box has been opened forever.
man we've been in a rapid demise of the republican since 1781. slow down.
Time will tell if I am wrong. I hope I am.
When President Clinton was impeached, he did lie to Congress. However, everybody is going to lie about that. I didn't want him impeached and surely didn't want him removed, and I never voted for the guy.
This is more a political move over a point of law. Now that we have entered that realm, it's a bad day indeed.
Now, if a party doesn't like the President, lets bring charges, even if not true or partially true.
My hope is the Senate still maintains a degree of decorum. The House has always been full of hotheads. Seats change way more often then do Senate seats. You have lots of representatives who were elected on hot button issues, so they head to DC wanting to take it by storm. They have one district to please to gain re-election. Senators at least have to win a state wide election. Hot button issues are still there, but they have to appeal to a wide variety of people.
I guess what I am saying is you don't find many Senators whos last job was tending bar...and I am on a first name basis with at least 5 bartenders, so I am not putting that down.
My words aren't meaningless. It has to be impeachable. I don't think it was. There were some shady dealing with Biden and his son. I don't think Biden is a spy, but it was clearly worth a look. The President has the authority to do that.
The president has the authority to ask a foreign government government to investigate his political opponent orchestrated through his personal attorney? Yeah, people believe that.
As I pointed out before, even senators of his own party don't believe that.
There are established methods with which proper channels are used to investigate Americans. That isn't one of them.
Quote:
Carry on, I understand you and others are part of the angry mob I was talking about.
Just understand that Pandora's Box has been opened forever.
It certainly has. Now a president can use approved funds as leverage to try and get foreign governments to interfere in our political process.
Quote:
To address their concerns, the framers of the U.S. Constitution included several clauses designed to reduce the opportunities for improper foreign influence in the American political system. One of the most-cited constitutional provisions during the Trump presidency is the foreign emoluments clause, an anti-corruption provision that prohibits government officials from receiving anything of value from foreign governments without the consent of Congress. In fact, Congress currently is suing President Trump over alleged violations of the emoluments clause.
What did the founders say about the dangers of foreign involvement in American elections or a president who might solicit such corrupt involvement?
George Washington, in his farewell address at the end of his presidency, argued that one of the greatest dangers to the United States involved the “insidious wiles” of foreign powers and their multiple avenues to improperly influence our political system. Washington urged Americans “to be constantly awake, since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government.”
Thomas Jefferson also sounded the alarm about “entanglements” between the United States and foreign governments, which he and other founders viewed with “perfect horror” due to the corruption that could result. Jefferson knew that a republic could not function if its chief executive would abuse his office—and the public trust—by soliciting personal political assistance from a foreign government.
the difference is that the situations are entirely different.
clinton was impeached over something we both agree that most people would lie about. especially since it had nothing to do with the original reasoning for the investigation.
trump actually got impeached over what he was accused of doing. if the dems ran an impeachment inquiry on something similar, like the whole stormy daniels saga, then i would be right there with you saying its not impeachable.
its pathetic, but not impeachable.
trying to get a foreign government to investigate your political rival for the primary reasoning that he is your biggest opponent most certainly impeachable conduct, as its abusing your power in order to advance your own personal agenda, not the benefit of the US.
bringing up clinton only works if the situations are similar. however, they are not similar.
He's whining like a spoiled child. Then of course he's now at the point of rambling on about nothing.
“It’s an amazing nothing. Some people say it’s the best nothing they’ve ever seen. It’s true. I met a woman yesterday that said that my nothing was the most beautiful nothing in America. Can you believe that? It’s true. It’s true. The do nothing Democrat’s...Booo... am I right? Their nothing is so much worse now than it was even after OBAMA. So bad. Not me. I’m going to make this nothing the greatest nothing America has ever seen. Believe me.”
In an apparent shot at both Pelosi, D-Calif., and Romney, Trump said: "I don't like people who use their faith as justification for doing what they know is wrong. Nor do I like people who say, 'I pray for you,' when they know that that's not so."
In an apparent shot at both Pelosi, D-Calif., and Romney, Trump said: "I don't like people who use their faith as justification for doing what they know is wrong. Nor do I like people who say, 'I pray for you,' when they know that that's not so."
Coming from a man who doesn't know the concept of faith that's an easy thing for him to say. Nor does he comprehend faithful.
It’s very close. You can drive up via Buffalo or Detroit and give socialism/communism a try. Who knows, you may like it....
WTH is wrong with you GOPers always trying to get people who disagree with your lunatic politics to leave the damn country? Is it a mental disorder of some sort? Is it a bully thing? Or maybe a combination of both? Y'all act like people who hate Trump or don't rave about guns and Jesus are somehow un-American; yet what's more un-American than the crap y'all and Trump keep pulling? I mean when did we become a white Christian country and not a country of immigrants? When did we decide it's cool to be chummy pals with Putin and other dictators? When did we decide to stop following laws when they are inconvenient (not morally wrong)? Guys like you sicken me, and there are a lot of you. Maybe it's you who should leave the country? How does that feel? Maybe we can find you a nice big cave in Russia or maybe Brazil.
It was the lefty nuts talking about leaving the country if Trump got elected...I have only one response to you...
I never said it. I'm a patriotic American. I stand and fight against what's wrong. You know, like the people who ended slavery, helped promote civil rights, protested the Vietnam war. The same type of things you would have been trying to tell them to leave the country for back then.
It was the lefty nuts talking about leaving the country if Trump got elected...I have only one response to you...
I never said it. I'm a patriotic American. I stand and fight against what's wrong. You know, like the people who ended slavery, helped promote civil rights, protested the Vietnam war. The same type of things you would have been trying to tell them to leave the country for back then.
So I didn’t support the same things? I’m not patriotic? You don’t know anything about me or my beliefs
It was the lefty nuts talking about leaving the country if Trump got elected...I have only one response to you...
I never said it. I'm a patriotic American. I stand and fight against what's wrong. You know, like the people who ended slavery, helped promote civil rights, protested the Vietnam war. The same type of things you would have been trying to tell them to leave the country for back then.
So I didn’t support the same things? I’m not patriotic? You don’t know anything about me or my beliefs
I'd say you've given us a peak behind the curtain with some of your posts.
It was the lefty nuts talking about leaving the country if Trump got elected...I have only one response to you...
I never said it. I'm a patriotic American. I stand and fight against what's wrong. You know, like the people who ended slavery, helped promote civil rights, protested the Vietnam war. The same type of things you would have been trying to tell them to leave the country for back then.
So I didn’t support the same things? I’m not patriotic? You don’t know anything about me or my beliefs
I'd say you've given us a peak behind the curtain with some of your posts.
So I didn’t support the same things? I’m not patriotic? You don’t know anything about me or my beliefs
I have no idea. What I can tell you is you promote a pathological liar as president and give people who disagree with you directions out of the country.
So I didn’t support the same things? I’m not patriotic? You don’t know anything about me or my beliefs
I have no idea. What I can tell you is you promote a pathological liar as president and give people who disagree with you directions out of the country.
People can take from that what they wish.
I was never a supporter of the Vietnam war, but I respected the soldiers. I believe all men are created equal. I do not support loser groups like Antifa, KKK, Black lives matter, etc...all lives matter! I’m sure you will call me a racist now lol. I do believe and support our current president. That’s my choice...too bad, so sad, if you don’t agree with my choice
The best way to get to know new posters is for them to tell you who they are and what they believe. Going around throwing out one liners tell other people nothing.
You'll soon find I will debate a topic with anyone actually willing to enter into an actual debate. For people who just babble one liners and throw shade, they get that in return as well.
The best way to get to know new posters is for them to tell you who they are and what they believe. Going around throwing out one liners tell other people nothing.
You'll soon find I will debate a topic with anyone actually willing to enter into an actual debate. For people who just babble one liners and throw shade, they get that in return as well.
I pretty much know who shares my outlook...didn’t take long
That's a large part of the problem. Not everyone lives on the extremes. If you actually tried to engage with posters rather than make this place a joke, you would soon find that often times posters aren't one extreme or the other. Many of them are moderates that do not walk a party line.
But suit yourself. That seems to be the way people look at things these days. They refuse to see there's any middle ground when it comes to anything. You either belong to one extreme to the other or someone people will claim you do anyway.
That's a large part of the problem. Not everyone lives on the extremes. If you actually tried to engage with posters rather than make this place a joke, you would soon find that often times posters aren't one extreme or the other. Many of them are moderates that do not walk a party line.
But suit yourself. That seems to be the way people look at things these days. They refuse to see there's any middle ground when it comes to anything. You either belong to one extreme to the other or someone people will claim you do anyway.
Got it. either someone is an extremist in your direction or they don't count. Got it. Sadly that line of thought is spreading faster than the coronavirus.
Got it. either someone is an extremist in your direction or they don't count. Got it. Sadly that line of thought is spreading faster than the coronavirus.
Whatever you say dude...you don’t think your an extremist from your point of view?
Got it. either someone is an extremist in your direction or they don't count. Got it. Sadly that line of thought is spreading faster than the coronavirus.
Whatever you say dude...you don’t think your an extremist from your point of view?
Got it. either someone is an extremist in your direction or they don't count. Got it. Sadly that line of thought is spreading faster than the coronavirus.
Whatever you say dude...you don’t think your an extremist from your point of view?
Whatever lol
Much of the time I don't think he realizes what he says/accuses others of, is exactly what he does.
In an apparent shot at both Pelosi, D-Calif., and Romney, Trump said: "I don't like people who use their faith as justification for doing what they know is wrong. Nor do I like people who say, 'I pray for you,' when they know that that's not so."
This thread is a good example of that is wrong in DC....you people just don't listen to me.;)
Really? I have to listen to you. Dude I know what’s wrong with Washington DC. There is a cheat, a swindler, a well known liar and racist in the WH . And people like you are on board lock step with trump and his deplorable ways and ignore his crimes. Pfft the trump era.
Democrats to plow ahead with Trump probes post-acquittal
House Democrats say even though President Trump was acquitted in the Senate, that doesn’t mean they are going to ease off their investigations into his administration.
Democrats are weighing whether to pursue new leads of possible wrongdoing or press forward with probes that were already underway when an anonymous whistleblower's allegations last year sparked the impeachment inquiry.
But no matter which route they take, Democrats are confident there is more wrongdoing to be uncovered — it’s just a matter of when and how grave.
“Donald Trump, I still believe, is a one-man crime wave, and we can’t let him get away with all of his other offenses against the Constitution and the people,” said Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), a member of the House Judiciary Committee.
The House impeached Trump on two charges in December, alleging he withheld nearly $391 million in U.S. aid to Ukraine as leverage to press Kyiv to open investigations to benefit his 2020 reelection, including into former Vice President Joe Biden, one of his main political rivals. Democrats say Trump then sought to cover up his actions.
The GOP-controlled Senate acquitted Trump on Wednesday, with all but one Republican arguing his conduct was not an impeachable offense.
But Democrats, pointing to Trump’s recent remarks maintaining that his July 25 call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky was “perfect,” have expressed concern that Trump will feel even more untouchable after his acquittal, despite being impeached in the House and admonished by moderate Republican senators.
One day after Trump’s acquittal, Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said the House was awaiting the outcome of several lawsuits previously filed by Democrats, including those targeting Trump’s financial records at Deutsche Bank and former White House counsel Don McGahn.
"We will continue to do our oversight, to protect and defend the Constitution," she said during a press conference Thursday, vowing to continue to investigate allegations of administrative wrongdoing, wherever it arises.
The McGahn case goes to the heart of a crucial question for House Democrats: Do they subpoena former national security adviser John Bolton and other witnesses related to the Ukraine saga? Pelosi declined to say if they would.
"Those cases still exist. If there are others that we see as an opportunity, we'll make a judgment at that time," she said. "But we have no plans right now."
Still, other Democrats have eagerly promoted the idea. Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) said this week that he would “likely” pursue Bolton’s testimony.
House Democrats relentlessly pushed for the Senate to allow witness testimony during Trump’s trial, arguing that the White House obstructed their impeachment inquiry at unprecedented levels by not allowing officials — both current and former — to testify.
Congressional Republicans, meanwhile, argued that doing so would set a dangerous precedent of letting the House rush through its impeachment process and then pass off its responsibilities to the Senate, rather than first battling for key evidence in the courts.
But now that acquittal is in the rearview mirror, the decision about whether to pursue Bolton’s testimony has been punted back to the House.
If the House decides to pursue Bolton, some Democrats believe they need to be ready for a legal battle and attacks from Republicans, who will characterize the effort as another partisan attempt to go after Trump through congressional investigations instead of at the ballot box.
Some Democrats, such as Rep. Ted Lieu (Calif.), said they would “support” going to court for Bolton’s testimony, which they say is key.
The Bolton deliberations come just weeks ahead of his book release in mid-March.
The New York Times made waves during the Senate trial by reporting that Bolton planned to dish damaging details about not only Trump’s contacts with Ukraine but also his contacts with other foreign leaders.
Democrats have noted that they are particularly interested in hearing from the former Trump official after the Times report said Bolton had similarly voiced concerns about Trump's contacts with China and Turkey, alleging that his former boss has granted personal favors to the leaders of the two countries.
“If you believe the Bolton leaks that this was not the only country that he was acting shady with, then I do think we should learn more about what's going on with Russia. What's going on with Turkey? What's going on with Saudi, North Korea, etc.?” said Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.), a member of both the Judiciary and Intelligence panels.
One example in the Times report said Bolton’s book will detail how Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan asked Trump — who ultimately agreed — to step in and ask members of his Cabinet to thwart a criminal probe into one of the country’s largest state-owned banks, known as Halkbank.
Democrats say they are going to discuss early next week how to move forward on the Trump probes.
“Those are all discussions for next week,” said Rep. Mike Quigley (D-Ill.), a member of the Intelligence panel. “Obviously, it's an area of interest.”
Democrats aren't the only ones talking about pursuing impeachment-related investigations post-acquittal.
Senate Republicans are vowing to move forward with their investigations into Joe Biden and his son, Hunter Biden.
Rudy Giuliani, the president’s personal attorney, also said he intends to keep digging up dirt on the president’s political opponents in an effort to uncover corruption in Ukraine, and he encouraged Trump to do the same.
"I would have no problem with him doing it. In fact, I'd have a problem with him not doing it. I think he would be saying that Joe Biden can get away with selling out the United States, making us a fool in the Ukraine,” Giuliani told NPR's Steve Inskeep on Tuesday.
Democrats argued that the administration’s insistence on going after the Bidens is further reason to keep conducting oversight.
“It's pretty rich to hear these complaints from Republicans when they're still demanding Hunter Biden's travel records and Giuliani is still scouring the gutters of Eastern Europe for dirt on Trump's opponents,” said freshman Rep. Tom Malinowski (D-N.J.). “As far as I'm concerned, the House should keep doing what we've been doing — legislating and conducting oversight.”
While House Democrats have already used the strongest weapon in their arsenal to check a president’s conduct, they say there is nothing in the Constitution to stop them from impeaching again if the president’s behavior is serious enough to warrant such a response.
“Any future prospects for impeachment will depend on a mixture of the gravity of the offense and then the imminent danger to democracy and the election,” Raskin said. “If the president insists upon violating the Constitution to try to fix this election, he is going to find his met his match in the House of Representatives. We're not gonna put up with that.”
Embarking on a second impeachment effort would not only be unprecedented; it also would undoubtedly invite fierce political blowback.
Such a move is also considered unlikely, with Democrats noting that Pelosi was initially reluctant to take on impeachment in the first place.
For now, Democrats are bracing to see what the president does next.
“I'm a big believer ... that we didn't just happen to stumble upon one time in his presidency that he happened to act corruptly,” Swalwell told The Hill. “A leopard doesn't change its spots.”
Bill Clinton was forever impeached too. Big deal. Whoopdy doo.
I was not even a Trump fan until Pelosi and the others started showing their ugliness. The more they do, the more I find myself aligning with Trump.
I did not even vote last election. I definitely will this time. Trump all the way. The Dems are doing a splendid job of giving people a reason to vote for Trump
I would vote for a dog before I voted for one of the Democratic candidates.
I NEVER in my life pulled every red lever until last year ... they’ve not driven to me to Trump but they have driven me back to the party i left 30 some years ago .... the sad part ... its not like i even remotely like the Republican Party its been a joke for decades ... but the Democratic Party is unrecognizable from even 4 years ago ... there all coco puffs ...
James carnival had it right .... the Democratic Party has lost their minds ...
I NEVER in my life pulled every red lever until last year ... they’ve not driven to me to Trump but they have driven me back to the party i left 30 some years ago .... the sad part ... its not like i even remotely like the Republican Party its been a joke for decades ... but the Democratic Party is unrecognizable from even 4 years ago ... there all coco puffs ...
James carnival had it right .... the Democratic Party has lost their minds ...
You’re absolutely right. The Democratic Party has been hijacked by ultra, ultra leftists. The sad thing is they have the education system on their side, indoctrinating our children. Eventually, if the left will take over, America as we know it will be done. They will remove free speech, they will remove religious freedom, and other freedoms will be removed
Weve already seen that the left is anti free speech and anti evangelical, and anti second amendment, which shows the constitution isn’t their guide, so how can we know any other part of the constitution will be upheld, if it goes against their agenda
I NEVER in my life pulled every red lever until last year ... they’ve not driven to me to Trump but they have driven me back to the party i left 30 some years ago .... the sad part ... its not like i even remotely like the Republican Party its been a joke for decades ... but the Democratic Party is unrecognizable from even 4 years ago ... there all coco puffs ...
James carnival had it right .... the Democratic Party has lost their minds ...
You’re absolutely right. The Democratic Party has been hijacked by ultra, ultra leftists. The sad thing is they have the education system on their side, indoctrinating our children. Eventually, if the left will take over, America as we know it will be done. They will remove free speech, they will remove religious freedom, and other freedoms will be removed
Weve already seen that the left is anti free speech and anti evangelical, and anti second amendment, which shows the constitution isn’t their guide, so how can we know any other part of the constitution will be upheld, if it goes against their agenda
Man you are a trip.
You know - the Dems are so anti-free speech the next thing you know they will be calling the free press and media the enemy of the people !!! Book It !
I NEVER in my life pulled every red lever until last year ... they’ve not driven to me to Trump but they have driven me back to the party i left 30 some years ago .... the sad part ... its not like i even remotely like the Republican Party its been a joke for decades ... but the Democratic Party is unrecognizable from even 4 years ago ... there all coco puffs ...
James carnival had it right .... the Democratic Party has lost their minds ...
You’re absolutely right. The Democratic Party has been hijacked by ultra, ultra leftists. The sad thing is they have the education system on their side, indoctrinating our children. Eventually, if the left will take over, America as we know it will be done. They will remove free speech, they will remove religious freedom, and other freedoms will be removed
Weve already seen that the left is anti free speech and anti evangelical, and anti second amendment, which shows the constitution isn’t their guide, so how can we know any other part of the constitution will be upheld, if it goes against their agenda
Man you are a trip.
You know - the Dems are so anti-free speech the next thing you know they will be calling the free press and media the enemy of the people !!! Book It !
People get kicked out of schools for stating the scientific fact that there are two genders.
Take your transphobia back to whatever alt-right nonsense you came from.
I’m not Afraid of trans. I have a very close friend that is one.
People can say More than two genders, if they like. . Just don’t force me to. That is an infringement on my free speech. When a student is kicked out of school for saying only two genders, his constitutional right has been VIOLATED
False accusations. I am not transphobic. I have a close friend that is one. But if you kick kids out of school for saying “two genders”, you are violating their constitutional right
Libs think someone disagreeing with their dogma is violating their constitutional rights. So they use that delusion to violate everyone else’s constitutional rights
Take your transphobia back to whatever alt-right nonsense you came from.
I’m not Afraid of trans. I have a very close friend that is one.
People can say More than two genders, if they like. . Just don’t force me to. That is an infringement on my free speech. When a student is kicked out of school for saying only two genders, his constitutional right has been VIOLATED
Hey menza, to use a Diam favorite, noone is infringing on your freedom of speech....
1. You can say whatever dumb crapolla you wish to.... you've been doing great already. 2. When a student gets banned for his comments IN A DIFFERENT COUNTRY ... it has ZERO impact on your abilty toexpress whatever opinion u wish in the good ole U S of A
Take your transphobia back to whatever alt-right nonsense you came from.
I’m not Afraid of trans. I have a very close friend that is one.
People can say More than two genders, if they like. . Just don’t force me to. That is an infringement on my free speech. When a student is kicked out of school for saying only two genders, his constitutional right has been VIOLATED
Hey menza, to use a Diam favorite, noone is infringing on your freedom of speech....
1. You can say whatever dumb crapolla you wish to.... you've been doing great already. 2. When a student gets banned for his comments IN A DIFFERENT COUNTRY ... it has ZERO impact on your abilty toexpress whatever opinion u wish in the good ole U S of A
You’re partly correct, I misspoke. The US student was not kicked out of school, he was kicked out of class, barred, and reported to the academic integrity board for saying that there are only two genders Still violated his constitutional rights.
Take your transphobia back to whatever alt-right nonsense you came from.
I’m not Afraid of trans. I have a very close friend that is one.
People can say More than two genders, if they like. . Just don’t force me to. That is an infringement on my free speech. When a student is kicked out of school for saying only two genders, his constitutional right has been VIOLATED
Hey menza, to use a Diam favorite, noone is infringing on your freedom of speech....
1. You can say whatever dumb crapolla you wish to.... you've been doing great already. 2. When a student gets banned for his comments IN A DIFFERENT COUNTRY ... it has ZERO impact on your abilty toexpress whatever opinion u wish in the good ole U S of A
ok, I'll edit. I confused two different stories, so when a student in PENNSYLVANIA is kicked out of and barred from class, reported to the Student Integrity Board, and his graduation put in jeopardy for merely saying there are only two genders, his constitutional rights have been violated
You might not of been on the board ... or you were on the board as a different poster ... we had an example the other day of a girl being kicked out of a Christian School for her sexuality based on a Facebook post - the Christian right argued that the school as a private entity could do what they wanted and discriminate against the girl if they wished to. Were HER constitutional rights violated or not?
No because Christians did it. And they had zero evidence that anything she did had anything to do with being gay or supporting gays. But hey, Jesus and stuff.
You might not of been on the board ... or you were on the board as a different poster ... we had an example the other day of a girl being kicked out of a Christian School for her sexuality based on a Facebook post - the Christian right argued that the school as a private entity could do what they wanted and discriminate against the girl if they wished to. Were HER constitutional rights violated or not?
You might not of been on the board ... or you were on the board as a different poster ... we had an example the other day of a girl being kicked out of a Christian School for her sexuality based on a Facebook post - the Christian right argued that the school as a private entity could do what they wanted and discriminate against the girl if they wished to. Were HER constitutional rights violated or not?
What does this have to do with Vaught?
You have destroyed them so they will now change the subject. Then Some will begin to twist the meaning of what you say. Followed by Clem posting his cute crayon drawings.
You might not of been on the board ... or you were on the board as a different poster ... we had an example the other day of a girl being kicked out of a Christian School for her sexuality based on a Facebook post - the Christian right argued that the school as a private entity could do what they wanted and discriminate against the girl if they wished to. Were HER constitutional rights violated or not?
What does this have to do with Vaught?
You have destroyed them so they will now change the subject. Then Some will begin to twist the meaning of what you say. Followed by Clem posting his cute crayon drawings.
You might not of been on the board ... or you were on the board as a different poster ... we had an example the other day of a girl being kicked out of a Christian School for her sexuality based on a Facebook post - the Christian right argued that the school as a private entity could do what they wanted and discriminate against the girl if they wished to. Were HER constitutional rights violated or not?
What does this have to do with Vaught?
Sorry Menza. If you can't connect the dots when they are in a straight line then you can play in the sand lot by yourself - or with the other towering intelectuals like 40 here who reads these posts and think you destroyed someone in a debate
You might not of been on the board ... or you were on the board as a different poster ... we had an example the other day of a girl being kicked out of a Christian School for her sexuality based on a Facebook post - the Christian right argued that the school as a private entity could do what they wanted and discriminate against the girl if they wished to. Were HER constitutional rights violated or not?
What does this have to do with Vaught?
Sorry Menza. If you can't connect the dots when they are in a straight line then you can play in the sand lot by yourself - or with the other towering intelectuals like 40 here who reads these posts and think you destroyed someone in a debate
You have destroyed them so they will now change the subject. Then Some will begin to twist the meaning of what you say. Followed by Clem posting his cute crayon drawings.
Some will even suggest which forums you should post in and will check in the archives to see where you post.
They want to rob me of my freedom to post where I please.
I will post in the Browns threads, no worries. If they either answer my challenges or stop posting to me, I will drop the subject. I said what Pelosi sent me to say, after all
Dagesh is a reference to a diacritic used in the Hebrew alphabet. It either hardens or doubles a consonant. If you look closely, my avatar is Judas Macabeus.
I am a fervently pro Israel evangeliical and consider the lefts attack on Christianity similar to Antiochus IV’s assault of the Jews. Theological liberals are trying to defile the temple of God by both infiltrating it internally and Political Libs are trying to suppress it externally it externally
Lib has false accusations. I don’t throw stones or kill. My only weapons are words. Your analogy is lacking reason, thought, logic, and all other related things
I am a fervently pro Israel evangeliical and consider the lefts attack on Christianity similar to Antiochus IV’s assault of the Jews. Theological liberals are trying to defile the temple of God by both infiltrating it internally and Political Libs are trying to suppress it externally it externally
The only sword for this battle is the Truth
We’ll be seeing this paragraph in someone’s manifesto soon enough.
I am a fervently pro Israel evangeliical and consider the lefts attack on Christianity similar to Antiochus IV’s assault of the Jews. Theological liberals are trying to defile the temple of God by both infiltrating it internally and Political Libs are trying to suppress it externally it externally
The only sword for this battle is the Truth
We’ll be seeing this paragraph in someone’s manifesto soon enough.
Doubtful. My spiritual ancestors were The ones who were burned at the stake. We do violence to none.
Sounds like the far left. Not one liberal has used a valid argument here. Strawmen, red herrings, ad hominems, generalizations, stereotypes, argument from fear, etc, etc , etc
I was wondering if 40 was ever going to find a friend. It a rough job but I guess somebody had to do it.
Well, it almost worked when 40's mom tied that pork chop around his neck. Fun for both until the pup lost interest after the chop was gone. Nice to see someone pick up the slack.
I am a fervently pro Israel evangeliical and consider the lefts attack on Christianity similar to Antiochus IV’s assault of the Jews. Theological liberals are trying to defile the temple of God by both infiltrating it internally and Political Libs are trying to suppress it externally it externally
The only sword for this battle is the Truth
We’ll be seeing this paragraph in someone’s manifesto soon enough.
We recognize that the battle is not against flesh and blood and the weapons are not physical weapons of war. The weapons of our warfare are words of truth. We are non violent and law abiding, recognizing that if we take up the sword unjustly, we will die by the sword
We have no manifesto. The only manifestation we seek is spiritual. Not by power or might, but by God’s Spirit.
Sounds like the far left. Not one liberal has used a valid argument here. Strawmen, red herrings, ad hominems, generalizations, stereotypes, argument from fear, etc, etc , etc
Says the guy who has make believe spiritual ancestors.
The dots dont lead back to the story of Sanders and Vaught. They are wholly unrelated.
Have you ever studied logic?
Ad hominems are the tool of someone who has no answer
HEY MENZA .... DIFFERENT THREAD. DIFFERENT TOPIC.
Yeah, I know, two is a hard number to keep track of.
only the Trump faithful could continue to claim victory in a debate where they were responding to the wrong topic in the wrong thread.
More proof that facts don't matter the the Trump gang.
Oh yeah. We were talking about the college kid who got kicked out of class and banned for saying there are two genders. There are only more than two in grammar.
The dots dont lead back to the story of Sanders and Vaught. They are wholly unrelated.
Have you ever studied logic?
Ad hominems are the tool of someone who has no answer
HEY MENZA .... DIFFERENT THREAD. DIFFERENT TOPIC.
Yeah, I know, two is a hard number to keep track of.
only the Trump faithful could continue to claim victory in a debate where they were responding to the wrong topic in the wrong thread.
More proof that facts don't matter the the Trump gang.
Oh yeah. We were talking about the college kid who got kicked out of class and banned for saying there are two genders. There are only more than two in grammar.
. Well done for catching up. See if you can now connect the dots.
The dots dont lead back to the story of Sanders and Vaught. They are wholly unrelated.
Have you ever studied logic?
Ad hominems are the tool of someone who has no answer
HEY MENZA .... DIFFERENT THREAD. DIFFERENT TOPIC.
Yeah, I know, two is a hard number to keep track of.
only the Trump faithful could continue to claim victory in a debate where they were responding to the wrong topic in the wrong thread.
More proof that facts don't matter the the Trump gang.
Oh yeah. We were talking about the college kid who got kicked out of class and banned for saying there are two genders. There are only more than two in grammar.
. Well done for catching up. See if you can now connect the dots.
Yeah.
The dots say this. Libs want to take away freedom of speech in matters of faith, marriage, and gender. Plenty of stories support this.
Libs are thought control and mind control despots
You can get fired, put in jail or sued for having a different opinion. Like for believing the Bible,for example
The dots dont lead back to the story of Sanders and Vaught. They are wholly unrelated.
Have you ever studied logic?
Ad hominems are the tool of someone who has no answer
HEY MENZA .... DIFFERENT THREAD. DIFFERENT TOPIC.
Yeah, I know, two is a hard number to keep track of.
only the Trump faithful could continue to claim victory in a debate where they were responding to the wrong topic in the wrong thread.
More proof that facts don't matter the the Trump gang.
Oh yeah. We were talking about the college kid who got kicked out of class and banned for saying there are two genders. There are only more than two in grammar.
. Well done for catching up. See if you can now connect the dots.
The dots dont lead back to the story of Sanders and Vaught. They are wholly unrelated.
Have you ever studied logic?
Ad hominems are the tool of someone who has no answer
HEY MENZA .... DIFFERENT THREAD. DIFFERENT TOPIC.
Yeah, I know, two is a hard number to keep track of.
only the Trump faithful could continue to claim victory in a debate where they were responding to the wrong topic in the wrong thread.
More proof that facts don't matter the the Trump gang.
Oh yeah. We were talking about the college kid who got kicked out of class and banned for saying there are two genders. There are only more than two in grammar.
. Well done for catching up. See if you can now connect the dots.
Did. Google the words fired for marriage views.
Libs try to fire people for saying they would vote against gay marriage. So far they fail. But in time they’ll get their way. Because they brainwash the kids who will be future leaders
Soon, free speech will be dead. Except in things libs support
Edit, so far they have failed in that the MANY instances of being fired for how one states they would vote on a real issue have resulted in lawsuits won by those who were discriminated against.
Google the words “ fired for position on marriage”.
DONT telll me that libs believe people should have free speech. Only on topics approved by liberals.
They don’t have power to remove free speech yet, BUT they’re working on it