All Things Impeachment Inquiry

Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
42,108
Reaction score
422
Points
83
Someone expressed an opinion you disliked so you called him a “pathetic baby.” That seems pathetic and childish, deuce.
It’s not an opinion. It’s a verifiable statement. And it’s wrong. And he’s a whiny baby.
 

Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
42,108
Reaction score
422
Points
83
It’s been reported that fox is “showing” it but not playing audio, deuce. Instead, the heads are describing the presentation. Perfect.
Probably because it’s the same arguments over and over and it’s getting boring. They played Schiffs looong speeches uninterrupted during their highest rated shows. The idea that they’re trying to hide the hearings is preposterous
 

Bad Gopher

A Loner, A Rebel
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
16,161
Reaction score
800
Points
113
Haha, and Hillary has a 98% chance of winning right? Thank God for the Electoral College- it pretty much assures another Trump landslide win. I wouldn't be surprised if the Reps. took back the House; people are discovering what a corrupt clownshow the Dem party has turned into.
Not to mention that the most vulnerable Republican senators up for election all have approval ratings in the 30s or low 40s in their states. The Senate is flipping, and I don't think there's anything that'll stop it.
 

bga1

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
38,613
Reaction score
1,101
Points
113
That is just stupid. Raju should be envious of a broken clock which at least is correct twice a day.
The Dems had a chance to battle executive privilege and they passed on that battle. They wrote their articles and stated that the evidence is overwhelming. Now that they have shown that they cannot even stipulate a crime and that it is all opinion, they are just whining. Their case stinks. I would love to hear witnesses but I doubt that the Dems are going to clear that hurdle and they will NOT want to swap witnesses. This is all noise they are shouting with full expectation of that the compliant media will pass on the propaganda.

If you want to battle executive privilege. Go to court.
 

jamiche

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 13, 2008
Messages
20,224
Reaction score
175
Points
63
Haha, and Hillary has a 98% chance of winning right? Thank God for the Electoral College- it pretty much assures another Trump landslide win. I wouldn't be surprised if the Reps. took back the House; people are discovering what a corrupt clownshow the Dem party has turned into.
Hillary had a 70% chance of winning, less. The popular vote came in almost exactly as the polls predicted. They were off by a cumulative 100K votes in PA, WI and MI. That was your electoral "landslide."
 

justthefacts

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 20, 2010
Messages
8,419
Reaction score
284
Points
83
That is just stupid. Raju should be envious of a broken clock which at least is correct twice a day.
The Dems had a chance to battle executive privilege and they passed on that battle. They wrote their articles and stated that the evidence is overwhelming. Now that they have shown that they cannot even stipulate a crime and that it is all opinion, they are just whining. Their case stinks. I would love to hear witnesses but I doubt that the Dems are going to clear that hurdle and they will NOT want to swap witnesses. This is all noise they are shouting with full expectation of that the compliant media will pass on the propaganda.

If you want to battle executive privilege. Go to court.
Raju was just reporting what GOP senators told him. You're saying Raju is wrong? You're saying that McConnell DOES plan to call a bunch of witnesses?
 

jamiche

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 13, 2008
Messages
20,224
Reaction score
175
Points
63
Thanks. It is not intended. From my view the secular world has a condescending attitude towards Christians- "Christianity is a crutch", Christians don't believe in science, Christians believe in fairy tales,etc." I think it is natural that when we hold strongly to a belief, people who oppose that belief are going to resist and possibly be offended or feel pressured. I do not see any nation in the world where Christians rule and force non-believers to believe. There are a ton of nations run by secularists or by religions (such as Hindu) where the gospel is outlawed. The church as an institution has been abused for power in the past and actually currently in the case of one denomination, but it is not the nature of Christianity to use force or impel people to believe.
Of course it was intended, humble beggar. You say stuff like "my God is your God" or "My God is the God" or "my God is the only God" all of the time. The Church has a two thousand year history of using force to compel people to believe.

People will always respect your religious beliefs if you leave them alone and don't use them as a cudgel. You fail on both counts, dude.
 

howeda7

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
40,150
Reaction score
1,145
Points
113
It’s been reported that fox is “showing” it but not playing audio, deuce. Instead, the heads are describing the presentation. Perfect.
Have to put it through the "real truth" translator. Then last night they just gave up and stopped showing it altogether. There was FISA documents to discuss!
 

howeda7

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
40,150
Reaction score
1,145
Points
113
Why didn't your pals in the house call all these new witnesses that are soooooo vitally important now?
They did. And Trump stone-walled them. Their only options were to proceed or wait a year + for court cases to drag out, which is what Trump wanted.
 
Last edited:

howeda7

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
40,150
Reaction score
1,145
Points
113
The Senate doesn't want Hunter Biden to testify because it would put millions more eyes upon the trial. McConnell doesn't want people to tune in or know what's being said. The lower the profile the better.
Trump's "robust defense" will begin on a Saturday morning at 8 AM. They obviously don't want anyone to see that.
 

howeda7

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
40,150
Reaction score
1,145
Points
113
Not to mention that the most vulnerable Republican senators up for election all have approval ratings in the 30s or low 40s in their states. The Senate is flipping, and I don't think there's anything that'll stop it.
I'm still not sure about that. AZ and CO will flip. Alabama will flip the other way. You still need 3 more. I can see getting 2/3 of Iowa/Maine/NC but sweeping them seems unlikely and I don't see any other viable targets. Maybe GA.
 

howeda7

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
40,150
Reaction score
1,145
Points
113
Thanks. It is not intended. From my view the secular world has a condescending attitude towards Christians- "Christianity is a crutch", Christians don't believe in science, Christians believe in fairy tales,etc." I think it is natural that when we hold strongly to a belief, people who oppose that belief are going to resist and possibly be offended or feel pressured. I do not see any nation in the world where Christians rule and force non-believers to believe. There are a ton of nations run by secularists or by religions (such as Hindu) where the gospel is outlawed. The church as an institution has been abused for power in the past and actually currently in the case of one denomination, but it is not the nature of Christianity to use force or impel people to believe.
You want to tell people who they can marry based on your religious beliefs. You want to tell women what they can do with their bodies based on your religious beliefs. You are fine banning and profling immigrants to this country based on their religious beliefs. You would be quite fine if this country was a Christian theocracy.

It may not be the nature of Christianity to force beliefs on others. But it is certainly the nature of your twisted version.
 

justthefacts

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 20, 2010
Messages
8,419
Reaction score
284
Points
83





You'd think a guy with one of the great memories of all time would have remembered Lev Parnas after this meeting.
 

OldBob53

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 15, 2019
Messages
1,019
Reaction score
129
Points
63
What are the odds that the Senate votes to convict? There must be at least some small chance.
 

howeda7

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
40,150
Reaction score
1,145
Points
113
What are the odds that the Senate votes to convict? There must be at least some small chance.
That they get to 67? 1/1000. That they get to 51, which would at least be symbolic? 2%
 

howeda7

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
40,150
Reaction score
1,145
Points
113
Apparently the defended is telling the jurors they better vote the way he wants or he'll "have their head on a pike." Gee, I wonder what would happen if a normal defended did that?
 

BarnBurner

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 12, 2010
Messages
9,918
Reaction score
245
Points
63
Of course it was intended, humble beggar. You say stuff like "my God is your God" or "My God is the God" or "my God is the only God" all of the time. The Church has a two thousand year history of using force to compel people to believe.

People will always respect your religious beliefs if you leave them alone and don't use them as a cudgel. You fail on both counts, dude.
Israel says hi jam jam. Doozy of a stupid statement, even for you.
 

BarnBurner

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 12, 2010
Messages
9,918
Reaction score
245
Points
63
Of course it was intended, humble beggar. You say stuff like "my God is your God" or "My God is the God" or "my God is the only God" all of the time. The Church has a two thousand year history of using force to compel people to believe.

People will always respect your religious beliefs if you leave them alone and don't use them as a cudgel. You fail on both counts, dude.
Huh. I don't ever remember being forced to believe.
 

Angry

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 8, 2012
Messages
1,304
Reaction score
41
Points
48
If you're not afraid, you're a fool. The majority of Americans want witnesses and believe the president should be convicted. They know a coverup when they see one. Most of them also know what SS and Medicare "reform" means. The election isn't going to go well for the Republican party.
This is even worse than your sports takes, which is really saying something.
 

short ornery norwegian

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 9, 2011
Messages
8,555
Reaction score
400
Points
83
To be fair - a lot of the information being presented by the House Managers is not new for the hard-core news junkies who have been following this closely from day 1. So, those people are complaining that it's repetitive.

But - I think it's fair to say that at least some of the Senate Members have not been pouring over this material - because they have other things to do - so at least some of the this material is new to them. I remember hearing one Senator (can't remember who) admit he had not read any of the transcripts from the House proceedings. And they are the jurors in this case. In fact, I will state that there are definitely people on this board who know this material better than many of the Senators.

And - the Senate is not the only audience here. The public is the other audience, and there are certainly members of the public who have not heard all of this information before. Believe it or not, there are people out there who do not watch Fox, CNN or MSNBC 24 hours a day.

The House Managers have two separate goals - 1. try to convince Senators to convict Trump
and 2. try to convince members of the public to vote against Trump in the fall (assuming that Trump is not convicted).
 

Tredwell

Active member
Joined
Aug 21, 2019
Messages
403
Reaction score
82
Points
28





You'd think a guy with one of the great memories of all time would have remembered Lev Parnas after this meeting.
“Take her out!” Trump reportedly said on the recording to Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman, after being told that the career foreign service officer was “badmouthing” him in Kyiv.

“Get rid of her!” a voice that appears to be Trump’s reportedly said on the recording. “Get her out tomorrow. I don’t care. Get her out tomorrow. Take her out. Okay? Do it.”


I don't understand....."Take Her Out"........the President was authorizing these two men, whom he never, ever, ever ever worked with and never, ever, ever, ever met to fire a US ambassador?
 

bga1

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
38,613
Reaction score
1,101
Points
113
To be fair - a lot of the information being presented by the House Managers is not new for the hard-core news junkies who have been following this closely from day 1. So, those people are complaining that it's repetitive.

But - I think it's fair to say that at least some of the Senate Members have not been pouring over this material - because they have other things to do - so at least some of the this material is new to them. I remember hearing one Senator (can't remember who) admit he had not read any of the transcripts from the House proceedings. And they are the jurors in this case. In fact, I will state that there are definitely people on this board who know this material better than many of the Senators.

And - the Senate is not the only audience here. The public is the other audience, and there are certainly members of the public who have not heard all of this information before. Believe it or not, there are people out there who do not watch Fox, CNN or MSNBC 24 hours a day.

The House Managers have two separate goals - 1. try to convince Senators to convict Trump
and 2. try to convince members of the public to vote against Trump in the fall (assuming that Trump is not convicted).
They are failing. The proceedings are so poorly thought of and boring that the audience for the impeachment of a president is less than half of the audience for the Kavanaugh hearing - which of course was offered up by the same scammers.
 
Top Bottom