All Things Impeachment Inquiry

GoodasGold

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 11, 2011
Messages
8,268
Reaction score
82
Points
48
What were Deripaska, Chalupa, Manafort and the Bidens doing in Ukraine? How was the Atlantic Council involved and how was the "WB" involved in Ukraine back in 2016? How big was the Biden money laundering scheme? Why did Manafort give Trump internal polling to Deripaska- a Clinton supporter?
Oy! So many questions
 

JimmyJamesMD

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 12, 2008
Messages
6,497
Reaction score
84
Points
48
You finally have a President who is doing just as you had hoped and you are missing it. Too bad. Maybe you will get to see Tulsi in make up commercials in a few years. For the next five years you are looking at the orange man. I hold out hope that by this fall your eyes will be open and you will be voting orange.
If he brings the troops home like he said he would, maybe Ill change my tune. I've stated foreign policy is really important to me, and Im not wavering on that.
 

Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
40,844
Reaction score
128
Points
63
Trump doesn't care about the investigation. Only that Ukraine announce it. This was clear in the impeachment testimony. 2 doesn't care. He's just defending his beloved Don (who he totally didn't vote for) in any way possible like the rest of the Trumpster's.
I don't agree with your characterization. 3rd hand descriptions of what Trump said do not sway me. Trump has every reason in the world to investigate if there is really the evidence they say there is. It's a HUGE win to him politically. It's justice. And it is a gigantic egg on the face of the MSM. If there's absolutely nothing to the allegation, then sure, maybe he just wants the announcement. But an investigation that is announced and never acted on, or clears Biden is a huge LOSS to him politically.
 

Dean S

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2011
Messages
6,599
Reaction score
75
Points
48
The trial of Trump seems to run like Chinese water torture. Drip, drip, drip and nothing happens until it breaks the subject into a clear psychosis. I believe that waterboarding was recently banned as a practice. Does that mean the trial will never occur under current law?
 

GoodasGold

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 11, 2011
Messages
8,268
Reaction score
82
Points
48
The trial of Trump seems to run like Chinese water torture. Drip, drip, drip and nothing happens until it breaks the subject into a clear psychosis. I believe that waterboarding was recently banned as a practice. Does that mean the trial will never occur under current law?
Torture is such a harsh term. Let’s call it enhanced Q&A.
 

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
5,925
Reaction score
461
Points
83

"
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., says she plans to send the articles of impeachment to the Senate next week, despite her ongoing concerns over how Republicans plan to conduct the Senate trial.
...
"In an impeachment trial, every Senator takes an oath to 'do impartial justice according to the Constitution and laws.' Every Senator now faces a choice: to be loyal to the President or the Constitution," Pelosi said in the letter.

Asked whether she thought the Senate trial would be "fair," she said no.

"
 

bga1

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
37,067
Reaction score
243
Points
63
The trial of Trump seems to run like Chinese water torture. Drip, drip, drip and nothing happens until it breaks the subject into a clear psychosis. I believe that waterboarding was recently banned as a practice. Does that mean the trial will never occur under current law?
Last night Chris Hahn was on a show and said that he hoped Pelosi would hold the articles back until at least the SOTU address. His reason- he thought it would drive Trump crazy. Wow, now there is a governing philosophy for the opposition party! What is your proudest achievement of the past two years?- "Well, we tried to drive Trump crazy..."
 

LesBolstad

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
3,906
Reaction score
84
Points
48
Last night Chris Hahn was on a show and said that he hoped Pelosi would hold the articles back until at least the SOTU address. His reason- he thought it would drive Trump crazy. Wow, now there is a governing philosophy for the opposition party! What is your proudest achievement of the past two years?- "Well, we tried to drive Trump crazy..."
Haha, it is total insanity. What happened to this being an emergency crisis? The Loony Left has collectively lost their mind.

Look no further than our own OT board with characters such as walrus and oldBoob. These guys are certifiably mentally ill with #TDS.
 

KillerGopherFan

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 15, 2013
Messages
11,326
Reaction score
45
Points
48
Last night Chris Hahn was on a show and said that he hoped Pelosi would hold the articles back until at least the SOTU address. His reason- he thought it would drive Trump crazy. Wow, now there is a governing philosophy for the opposition party! What is your proudest achievement of the past two years?- "Well, we tried to drive Trump crazy..."
Chris Hahn is a dipshit. But that’s common for the Dems.
 

GoodasGold

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 11, 2011
Messages
8,268
Reaction score
82
Points
48
Last night Chris Hahn was on a show and said that he hoped Pelosi would hold the articles back until at least the SOTU address. His reason- he thought it would drive Trump crazy. Wow, now there is a governing philosophy for the opposition party! What is your proudest achievement of the past two years?- "Well, we tried to drive Trump crazy..."
Crazier.
 

Dean S

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2011
Messages
6,599
Reaction score
75
Points
48
I think Pelosi was just buying time for the House to get its ducks in a row. The Senate will do whatever the Senate wants to do and it never was about anything but getting through the holidays and letting the floor leaders have a week or two to get their arguments ready. I will venture a guess that the whole things is a tired show without the big time witnesses. If they show up, it will be quite the fireworks display we all want to see. My guess is nothing gets settled and Trump is re-elected in a landslide against a feeble looking Joe Biden.
 

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
5,925
Reaction score
461
Points
83
I think Pelosi was just buying time for the House to get its ducks in a row. The Senate will do whatever the Senate wants to do and it never was about anything but getting through the holidays and letting the floor leaders have a week or two to get their arguments ready. I will venture a guess that the whole things is a tired show without the big time witnesses. If they show up, it will be quite the fireworks display we all want to see. My guess is nothing gets settled and Trump is re-elected in a landslide against a feeble looking Joe Biden.
Depends what you mean by landslide. This country has rarely elected a president with even breaking the 60% threshold in popular vote. Too divided. Always have been, and we are as worse today as it has ever been.

No matter who the Dems nominate, yes even Sanders, they'll at least get near 50% of the vote. That's how many people hate Trump.


New articles can be brought against Trump if Bolton and/or McGahn testify later. So be it
 

Dean S

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2011
Messages
6,599
Reaction score
75
Points
48
Let's us get real. The policy position of Warren and Sanders are very expensive propositions and pie in the sky ideas at best. Republicans will not vote for universal socialism. Free college? Off the rail healthcare run by the Social Security Administration? I exaggerate a bit, but that is how it will come across to people who worry that their retirement income of social security will be raided for the sake of "do nothings." It isn't true, but that will be a wedge one way or another. Trump wins if he does not get convicted.
 

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
5,925
Reaction score
461
Points
83
Let's us get real. The policy position of Warren and Sanders are very expensive propositions and pie in the sky ideas at best. Republicans will not vote for universal socialism. Free college? Off the rail healthcare run by the Social Security Administration? I exaggerate a bit, but that is how it will come across to people who worry that their retirement income of social security will be raided for the sake of "do nothings." It isn't true, but that will be a wedge one way or another. Trump wins if he does not get convicted.
Sure, I think Trump beats Warren and Sanders, basically because of what you just said.
 

howeda7

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
38,046
Reaction score
378
Points
83
I think Pelosi was just buying time for the House to get its ducks in a row. The Senate will do whatever the Senate wants to do and it never was about anything but getting through the holidays and letting the floor leaders have a week or two to get their arguments ready. I will venture a guess that the whole things is a tired show without the big time witnesses. If they show up, it will be quite the fireworks display we all want to see. My guess is nothing gets settled and Trump is re-elected in a landslide against a feeble looking Joe Biden.
Because Trump is not the least bit feeble. He has dragon energy!

 

Dean S

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2011
Messages
6,599
Reaction score
75
Points
48
Why would I care if one county decides to not take refugees? Were they well equipped to take refugees? Do they have other things they want to do with their money? Other issues worthy of their charity? Veterans? Roads? Vaccination? Pre-school? Healthcare?
 

Dean S

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2011
Messages
6,599
Reaction score
75
Points
48
They weren’t taking any, already.

They went the unnecessary step of having a vote because they are old white bigots.
They took the vote because they had a deadline to make a decision.
 

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
5,925
Reaction score
461
Points
83
They took the vote because they had a deadline to make a decision.
Huh? What deadline?

Trump gave local governments the option to hold a vote, if they chose to. There was no requirement to hold a vote.
 

howeda7

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
38,046
Reaction score
378
Points
83
With President Trump facing an impeachment trial over his efforts to pressure Ukraine to investigate former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. and his son Hunter Biden, Russian military hackers have been boring into the Ukrainian gas company at the center of the affair, according to security experts.
The hacking attempts against Burisma, the Ukrainian gas company on whose board Hunter Biden served, began in early November, as talk of the Bidens, Ukraine and impeachment was dominating the news in the United States.
It is not yet clear what the hackers found, or precisely what they were searching for. But the experts say the timing and scale of the attacks suggest that the Russians could be searching for potentially embarrassing material on the Bidens — the same kind of information that Mr. Trump wanted from Ukraine when he pressed for an investigation of the Bidens and Burisma, setting off a chain of events that led to his impeachment.
The Russian tactics are strikingly similar to what American intelligence agencies say was Russia’s hacking of emails from Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman and the Democratic National Committee during the 2016 presidential campaign. In that case, once they had the emails, the Russians used trolls to spread and spin the material, and built an echo chamber to widen its effect.




 

Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
40,844
Reaction score
128
Points
63
Someone will need to remind me what exactly “Russia” found in Hillary’s emails. Other than what official investigations found and released, what was it? If they had everything, surely these troll farms put out a high volume of embarrassing revelations But I can’t seem to recall any.
 

Dean S

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2011
Messages
6,599
Reaction score
75
Points
48
Huh? What deadline?

Trump gave local governments the option to hold a vote, if they chose to. There was no requirement to hold a vote.
Do you live on this planet? Just because it is an option does not mean it should be tabled. These people who lead don't stand around and ignore what is optional. It isn't optional. It really is required. They took a look at what they wanted and they made a decision. That is leadership, not followership. They had to make the vote. And, because of that, resources will either be directed toward them or away based on their needs. And, to get those resources they needed to make decisions. It isn't optional. Sitting around on your thumb is no way to go about life.
 

justthefacts

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 20, 2010
Messages
7,617
Reaction score
64
Points
48
Someone will need to remind me what exactly “Russia” found in Hillary’s emails. Other than what official investigations found and released, what was it? If they had everything, surely these troll farms put out a high volume of embarrassing revelations But I can’t seem to recall any.
It's not clear to me what your point is here. Is it that it was no big deal that Russia hacked Podesta's (not Hillary's) emails? Are you suggesting that they hacked his email and only released the unimportant emails, but sat on the really salacious stuff?
 

Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
40,844
Reaction score
128
Points
63
It's not clear to me what your point is here. Is it that it was no big deal that Russia hacked Podesta's (not Hillary's) emails? Are you suggesting that they hacked his email and only released the unimportant emails, but sat on the really salacious stuff?
ah, so Russia didn't hack Hillary's emails. That's what I've heard for 3 years. Remember, Trump told them to hack her emails and the next day they did? And this proves collusion. This may not have been central to the legal arguments, but it was central to the public ones.
On Podesta, anything damaging released? I can't recall seeing any. I can't imagine there wasn't quite a bit of damaging stuff in there, so did they?
 

bga1

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
37,067
Reaction score
243
Points
63
It's not clear to me what your point is here. Is it that it was no big deal that Russia hacked Podesta's (not Hillary's) emails? Are you suggesting that they hacked his email and only released the unimportant emails, but sat on the really salacious stuff?
The really salacious stuff- if it were the Russians, is better retained for blackmail. That's one option.
Another option is that the Russian hacking narrative is fake and Crowdstrike is acting as a paid consultant of the DNC creating the narrative they wanted. It sure is crazy that the FBI decided to just take Crowdstrike's word for it in this case. Hmmm. And we now know beyond a shadow of a doubt that the key players making that decision were in the tank for Hillary and the DNC and actually knowingly using the DNC's oppo research to help her.
 

OldBob53

Active member
Joined
Oct 15, 2019
Messages
641
Reaction score
76
Points
28
Looks like we might have a trial in the Senate, McConnel backing off his dismissal idea. It all depends on polling and 60+ percent now favor a trial with evidence.
 
Top Bottom