Topic: REEE: Donald Trump Hasn't Yet Been Impeached. What's Next? [serious discussion] - page 3. (Read 1249 times)

That timeline is absolutely false.

"The e-mail shows that the meeting was for the purpose of getting Ukraine to back off of its corruption probe of Burisma. The e-mail, shown below, argued that Burisma had been unfairly targeted by Shokin without evidence and outside of due process. It also noted very pointedly that two “high profile US citizens” worked with Burisma, and named Hunter Biden explicitly:

https://hotair.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/burisma-1-768x360.png"

https://hotair.com/archives/ed-morrissey/2019/11/05/uh-oh-hunter-bidens-name-pops-2016-state-dept-e-mails-discussing-end-burisma-corruption-probe/

Are you really arguing that Hunter Biden was just some unwitting bystander as a board member of some "formerly corrupt" company which suddenly ceased being corrupt once Hunter joined the board? Are you saying a board member of the company not only was unaware of these operations in the past, but continued to be unaware of the attempts to cover up these facts as he was on the board? Seems like a long list of "coincidences"

You aren't interested in rule of law, you are interested only in serving your bias. You need only insinuation and speculation to condemn Trump and anyone associated with him, but you are eager to ignore documented factual evidence of very high level corruption when it is the party that serves your bias. You are either a liar or a moron, or both.

I agree with your concepts, but am still waiting for some explanation of what the "Impeachable Offense" was pre-destined to be, aside from the impeachable offense of "Trump being Trump."

You're absolutely right.

This is the only logical defense from Republicans and I think it holds true. The witnesses that democrats put forward did not have first hand knowledge of the phone call except for Sondland and he has not laid out a case for impeachment or a case for quid pro quo. We know two things - One, the President did mention Joe Biden during a call to Ukrainian President Zelensky but it's not clear whether Trump was tying military aid to a specific investigation into Hunter Biden and Burisma. Two - High ranking US officials met with Zelensky upwards of five times after the call was made and before the whistler blower complaint went public and not once during those meetings was Joe Biden mentioned. Not one democrat has been willing to explain why it is Trump attempted to extort the Ukrainians but not at all follow through with his request to investigate the Biden's. The logical conclusion that house democrats will not accept is that Trump was "mouthing off" as he always does in these phone calls and was using Hunter Biden and Burisma as an example of ongoing corruption within Ukraine and was not specifically referencing an investigation into Joe Biden in order to get military aid.

And you think about it, it's not too surprising. Trump withholding aid for Ukraine to get anti-corruption efforts going with a new administration is not particularly unusual. The narrative is that the U.S. State Department expected Ukraine to receive military aid and that it surprised State Department lawyers that Trump withheld the foreign aid. But Trump has been critical of giving away millions of dollars of cash to foreign nations in the past and has particularly been critical of offer up huge sums of money to corrupt nations (Hint hint, Iran Nuclear Deal). So is anyone looking at this Ukraine situation logically actually expected to believe that Trump withheld this aid for investigations of his political rivals OR is it more logical that Trump withheld aid for Ukraine to pursue anti-corruption efforts in a country that is riddled by mishandling of funds?

Democrats know well enough that public support for impeachment is dwindling and that the progressive wing of the democratic party has a good shot at winning the nomination which will cause a split in democratic voting forcing independents to support Trump in the 2020 election. They're fairly desperate to tarnish the President's record here but it's important to note - don't get me wrong - I'll be the first to say that I think Trump did not handle the situation professionally, but it's not something I, nor any American expects at this point because "Trump is Trump". Trump is far from being a professional President and his supporters and opponents understand this to the point where we do not expect anything else.

Check the site for links and messaging.


Democrats Getting 'Cold Feet' As Impeachment Support Evaporates

What about what The State Department has to say about it?

https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/state-department-releases-detailed-accounts-biden-ukraine-corruption

Yeah that's so weird people report on topical subjects in a timely manner. Definitely suspect.

The good socialist is all about giving, and taking. Talking about giving to you if you give him power, and then using that power to take from you after the election.

^^^ But Bernie started paying his people $15 per hour! What does the Bernie leech have to say about that?

I think that normal Democrats were all taken over by an Impeach Leech, which wormed it's way out of flying saucers and attached itself with suckers to each Democrat's back, drilling through to the spinal column to effect full control on the spineless.

Some of these alien creatures early on attempted to attach to and control Repubs but found their blood repugnant.

Some of the Leeches have become very fat and happy, for example the one on Bernie Sanders.

Witnesses and subpoenas might not be needed. Oh, I guess they will be, after all.


EXCLUSIVE – President Trump makes unscheduled stop at military hospital to undergo battery of tests for possible deliberate poisoning of food with “time delayed” chemical agent; food tester gravely ill – White House connected source

I am glad you think impeachment is the kind of act that is on the level of a cop putting his thumb on the scale as he weighs out a couple joints for his report. The reason obstruction is a favorite charge levied by the democrats is because it is it is a process charge that is extremely ambiguous and very harshly punished. The sort of crime that you can convict some one of saying they had a ham sandwich at 2:15 when it was really 2:13. You abduct the target under color of law, scare the shit out of them (usually in front of their family), you then grill them with thousands of questions over and over and over again for hours and days, recording the entire process so you can review it later for any inconsistencies which could be construed as a deceit not matter how innocent, and prosecuted with felony prison time. It is right up the Demgulag's alley. Especially when you don't have any evidence of crimes, it is the easiest way to invent them.

Yeah! Keep it serious! By the way disagreeing with things I believe I don't consider to be at all serious, so you better watch it and get in line or I will be forced to use my totalitarian censorshi... I mean moderating a serious discussion abilities.


Why would they be silent? Oh right the left are violent lunatics who attack, harass, and assault people who don't think like they do and agree with their beliefs. It is intolerance of intolerance though, so its ok.

Who knows? Maybe it's headed for a Bimbo Explosion.

Oh wait... That was Bill Clinton...

Obi-Wan Kenobi, you are our only hope.     

Either that or they don't see any evidence of wrong doing, and see the left flailing frantically to try to create a scandal before 2020 because it is their only hope.

I'm good as long as they don't mention subpoe—

Why would anyone delete this golden evidence of the kind of mind that justifies totalitarian censorship?

herp derp retarded people throwing retarded ideas out. derp herp.

If yall could actually have an actual conversation with you know, sourced information from reality instead of shit out of your assholes, you wouldn't have your comments deleted.

But instead, shit from assholes = required to post. And then whine when other people remove the shit.

inb4 this post is removed too.

But is he buying the next round of beers?

It's quite interesting that Twitch has presented a thread as if it were real, about something that's only considered real in a subset of circles of discussion. He proposes to keep discussion serious, about the one ring circus. Regardless of where and on who the animals Schiff****.

Twitchy Seal thinks the ends justify the means. When you stand for nothing, you fall for anything. That type is just as dangerous because there are so many so eager to believe anything as long as it works for their preferred belief system bias. That's the problem with true believers, they are convinced they are fighting for whats right so much they blind themselves to the fact that they are the vehicle of that destruction they claim to be fighting.