Nancy Pelosi to announce at 5:00 on Trump impeachment

[Landslide]

Smack!

Yovanovitch communicated with Dem staffer on 'delicate' issue after complaint, emails show, despite testimony

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/mar...delicate-issue

[ransil]

if Biden drop out of the race , will they still continue cause he is not a political opponent any more? not sure he is at the moment, he has to make it past the other dozen to get there.

[Gittinwidit]

Good point but I'm sure the DNC will do what they have to do to keep JB in for the sole purpose. But I think JB and EW will be unofficially "toast" after Michael Bloomberg thrown his hat in today...

[Landslide]

Originally Posted by Gittinwidit

Good point but I'm sure the DNC will do what they have to do to keep JB in for the sole purpose. But I think JB and EW will be unofficially "toast" after Michael Bloomberg thrown his hat in today...

EW congratulated MB for joining in the potus run then sent him a link to her healthcare for all taxation calculator.

[thefishguy77]

There is a meme around stating the dems have tried to in some degree impeach 6/6 of the last presidents. Its false. Its only 5/6 as Ford was only president for like 2 years...
Nixon and Trump are the only 2 that gained enough traction to allow them take it to the next level. But it definitely shows a pattern for the Democratic party, Repugs are probably just as bad.

America needs to
GRIP
Get
Rid
of
Incumbent
Politicians



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[reddman]

Totally agreed thefishguy, I just wanted to add that the R's are definitely just as bad. I was a registered R until Rand Paul dropped out of the race and latched onto Trumps nuts. Then I dropped them like a bad habit, and voted Libertarian (I'm in Utah, so R's get my electoral vote no matter what, it was a protest vote ).

The Repubs spent Obama's entire term bashing him and investigation bullshit like him being born in Kenya. Neither of the big two parties has moral high ground. But riddle me this Trump lovers, would you be cool with Obama doing exactly what Trump appears to have done? Using taxpayer dollars to force a country who desperately needs that help (Ukraine) to help out his personal campaign? Be real, you would lose your fucking shit, and rightfully so. It's wrong. Period.

History will not be kind to people who put party over the Constitution (Article I, Section 9, Clause 8 for example). If any US president is getting personal favors in trade for US Government money, they no longer are beholden solely to the American people, and cannot be trusted to only be acting purely on behalf of the people any longer. That foreign government will have some dirt and some sway on the President, and that partial loyalty is entirely unacceptable. I wouldn't let Obama get away with it, and I won't let Trump either.

And leave the "But what about..." arguments at the door. Only children point at Billy and tell their mommy "but Billy did X!" and think that excuses their own rule breaking. Hilary sucked, and she's also entirely irrelevant these days. Get over her. Trump looks to be doing some seriously shady shit.

[rockbuggy84]

Originally Posted by reddman

Totally agreed thefishguy, I just wanted to add that the R's are definitely just as bad. I was a registered R until Rand Paul dropped out of the race and latched onto Trumps nuts. Then I dropped them like a bad habit, and voted Libertarian (I'm in Utah, so R's get my electoral vote no matter what, it was a protest vote ).

The Repubs spent Obama's entire term bashing him and investigation bullshit like him being born in Kenya. Neither of the big two parties has moral high ground. But riddle me this Trump lovers, would you be cool with Obama doing exactly what Trump appears to have done? Using taxpayer dollars to force a country who desperately needs that help (Ukraine) to help out his personal campaign? Be real, you would lose your fucking shit, and rightfully so. It's wrong. Period.

History will not be kind to people who put party over the Constitution (Article I, Section 9, Clause 8 for example). If any US president is getting personal favors in trade for US Government money, they no longer are beholden solely to the American people, and cannot be trusted to only be acting purely on behalf of the people any longer. That foreign government will have some dirt and some sway on the President, and that partial loyalty is entirely unacceptable. I wouldn't let Obama get away with it, and I won't let Trump either.

And leave the "But what about..." arguments at the door. Only children point at Billy and tell their mommy "but Billy did X!" and think that excuses their own rule breaking. Hilary sucked, and she's also entirely irrelevant these days. Get over her. Trump looks to be doing some seriously shady shit.

Go ahead and point us to all the “shady shit” that Trump IS doing. But we want factually proven evidence, so go ahead and leave “but the Dems said he did it” argument at the door.

[thefishguy77]

Originally Posted by reddman

Totally agreed thefishguy, I just wanted to add that the R's are definitely just as bad. I was a registered R until Rand Paul dropped out of the race and latched onto Trumps nuts. Then I dropped them like a bad habit, and voted Libertarian (I'm in Utah, so R's get my electoral vote no matter what, it was a protest vote ).

The Repubs spent Obama's entire term bashing him and investigation bullshit like him being born in Kenya. Neither of the big two parties has moral high ground. But riddle me this Trump lovers, would you be cool with Obama doing exactly what Trump appears to have done? Using taxpayer dollars to force a country who desperately needs that help (Ukraine) to help out his personal campaign? Be real, you would lose your fucking shit, and rightfully so. It's wrong. Period.

History will not be kind to people who put party over the Constitution (Article I, Section 9, Clause 8 for example). If any US president is getting personal favors in trade for US Government money, they no longer are beholden solely to the American people, and cannot be trusted to only be acting purely on behalf of the people any longer. That foreign government will have some dirt and some sway on the President, and that partial loyalty is entirely unacceptable. I wouldn't let Obama get away with it, and I won't let Trump either.

And leave the "But what about..." arguments at the door. Only children point at Billy and tell their mommy "but Billy did X!" and think that excuses their own rule breaking. Hilary sucked, and she's also entirely irrelevant these days. Get over her. Trump looks to be doing some seriously shady shit.

His VP did it...
And there are links to the fact the Obama had direct knowledge of it happening and did nothing about it.

So far there is Zero public evidence that he, Trump, threatened to withhold aid if they didn’t investigate the Biden family. There IS public evidence that VP Biden threatened to withhold aid if they did not fire the prosecutor that was in charge of an investigation that his son got a BOD job on. One he had zero qualifications for but received shortly after over a billion tax payer dollars were transferred to a private bank and suddenly disappeared.

Trump will not get my vote the 2nd time, because of his 2nd amendment stance, but I support what he is doing. I voted for him the first time because he was an outsider than many republicans were against. The entire congress, all corrupt IMHO, are currently against him as well. He must be doing something correct.

He was sent there to drain the swamp. The Biden’s are a huge part pf the swamp. They need to be investigated.

You say your against corruption in government? Then why would you be against investigations that could help uncover the most corrupt of the bunch. You always go for the head of the snake if you want to make a difference. Current politicians go for low hanging fruit to say “Look what I did. I helped the country so much.” Yet all they did was interchange some people that had zero real influence in the corruption to start with.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Buck Wild Racing]

Originally Posted by Juztyn00

No aid was withheld and they didn't help on an already ongoing investigation. It was even given before the date it was required to be dispersed. If Trump was with holding something, you'd think they would admit to knowing it was being withheld, The Ukrainian officials had no clue.

All Foreign Policy (or all policy in general) is a form of quid pro quo. Some action is taken to achieve a desired result. The Bidens were involved in some shady dealing and I think the left has burned one of their top candidates by pushing this narrative. The main thing Trump asked about in the call was Crowdstrike (the Ukraine based company that claimed Russia hacked the DNC server). That was one of the origins of the Russia collusion story that has dropped off the face of the earth. By focusing on Biden, who probably wont win the primary, the left is intentionally missing the forest for the trees.

The president of the United States can withhold aid for any reason. Its part of his responsibility as head of foreign policy. This entire thing is fake. All of it.

[Buck Wild Racing]

Originally Posted by reddman

Totally agreed thefishguy, I just wanted to add that the R's are definitely just as bad. I was a registered R until Rand Paul dropped out of the race and latched onto Trumps nuts. Then I dropped them like a bad habit, and voted Libertarian (I'm in Utah, so R's get my electoral vote no matter what, it was a protest vote ).

The Repubs spent Obama's entire term bashing him and investigation bullshit like him being born in Kenya. Neither of the big two parties has moral high ground. But riddle me this Trump lovers, would you be cool with Obama doing exactly what Trump appears to have done? Using taxpayer dollars to force a country who desperately needs that help (Ukraine) to help out his personal campaign? Be real, you would lose your fucking shit, and rightfully so. It's wrong. Period.

History will not be kind to people who put party over the Constitution (Article I, Section 9, Clause 8 for example). If any US president is getting personal favors in trade for US Government money, they no longer are beholden solely to the American people, and cannot be trusted to only be acting purely on behalf of the people any longer. That foreign government will have some dirt and some sway on the President, and that partial loyalty is entirely unacceptable. I wouldn't let Obama get away with it, and I won't let Trump either.

And leave the "But what about..." arguments at the door. Only children point at Billy and tell their mommy "but Billy did X!" and think that excuses their own rule breaking. Hilary sucked, and she's also entirely irrelevant these days. Get over her. Trump looks to be doing some seriously shady shit.

Obama did do pretty much the exact same thing. With the exact same country. In order to force an investigation into a member of the Trump campaign.

You know what, he was allowed to do it. He was president. Trump is allowed to do it to.

[thefishguy77]

Originally Posted by Buck Wild Racing

The president of the United States can withhold aid for any reason. Its part of his responsibility as head of foreign policy. This entire thing is fake. All of it.

Yup^^^

It wasn’t supposed to happen till after he won re-election. It was supposed to be the next terms Russia Russia Russia. But AOC and the Gang blew their load to early. And its going to reflect next election heavily on both sides. Any repugs that support this witch hunt will probably be ousted and many dems will probably be ousted as well.
This may work out better for the American people than expected as getting any incumbents out pf office regardless of the side of the isle they sit on will help our Republic.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Landslide]

Originally Posted by reddman

Totally agreed thefishguy, I just wanted to add that the R's are definitely just as bad. I was a registered R until Rand Paul dropped out of the race and latched onto Trumps nuts. Then I dropped them like a bad habit, and voted Libertarian (I'm in Utah, so R's get my electoral vote no matter what, it was a protest vote ).

The Repubs spent Obama's entire term bashing him and investigation bullshit like him being born in Kenya. Neither of the big two parties has moral high ground. But riddle me this Trump lovers, would you be cool with Obama doing exactly what Trump appears to have done? Using taxpayer dollars to force a country who desperately needs that help (Ukraine) to help out his personal campaign? Be real, you would lose your fucking shit, and rightfully so. It's wrong. Period.

History will not be kind to people who put party over the Constitution (Article I, Section 9, Clause 8 for example). If any US president is getting personal favors in trade for US Government money, they no longer are beholden solely to the American people, and cannot be trusted to only be acting purely on behalf of the people any longer. That foreign government will have some dirt and some sway on the President, and that partial loyalty is entirely unacceptable. I wouldn't let Obama get away with it, and I won't let Trump either.

And leave the "But what about..." arguments at the door. Only children point at Billy and tell their mommy "but Billy did X!" and think that excuses their own rule breaking. Hilary sucked, and she's also entirely irrelevant these days. Get over her. Trump looks to be doing some seriously shady shit.

What about the cargo plane loaded with pallets stacked with tax payer money your boy Obama dropped off to our sworn enemy Iran? Nothing shady there huh?

[Johann]

Originally Posted by reddman

And leave the "But what about..." arguments at the door. Only children point at Billy and tell their mommy "but Billy did X!" and think that excuses their own rule breaking. Hilary sucked, and she's also entirely irrelevant these days. Get over her. Trump looks to be doing some seriously shady shit.

Uh, spare us the "what about" what about arguments since you just "what abouted" the Reps in the Obama era.

There is a laundry list of BS that Obama pulled that was self serving. Lying about Benghazi right before election day got him reelected.

[wireman]

Originally Posted by thefishguy77

Trump will not get my vote the 2nd time, because of his 2nd amendment stance, but I support what he is doing.

This is interesting. Besides bump stocks, what have the feds taken away from you, because of Trump? Your state's restrictions will probably stay way ahead of anything coming out of DC.

[thumping]

Originally Posted by reddman

Totally agreed thefishguy, I just wanted to add that the R's are definitely just as bad. I was a registered R until Rand Paul dropped out of the race and latched onto Trumps nuts. Then I dropped them like a bad habit, and voted Libertarian (I'm in Utah, so R's get my electoral vote no matter what, it was a protest vote ).

The Repubs spent Obama's entire term bashing him and investigation bullshit like him being born in Kenya. Neither of the big two parties has moral high ground. But riddle me this Trump lovers, would you be cool with Obama doing exactly what Trump appears to have done? Using taxpayer dollars to force a country who desperately needs that help (Ukraine) to help out his personal campaign? Be real, you would lose your fucking shit, and rightfully so. It's wrong. Period.

History will not be kind to people who put party over the Constitution (Article I, Section 9, Clause 8 for example). If any US president is getting personal favors in trade for US Government money, they no longer are beholden solely to the American people, and cannot be trusted to only be acting purely on behalf of the people any longer. That foreign government will have some dirt and some sway on the President, and that partial loyalty is entirely unacceptable. I wouldn't let Obama get away with it, and I won't let Trump either.

And leave the "But what about..." arguments at the door. Only children point at Billy and tell their mommy "but Billy did X!" and think that excuses their own rule breaking. Hilary sucked, and she's also entirely irrelevant these days. Get over her. Trump looks to be doing some seriously shady shit.

So, you want to just ignore the hypocrisy of it all? How liberal...I mean libertarian of you.

[thefishguy77]

Originally Posted by wireman

This is interesting. Besides bump stocks, what have the feds taken away from you, because of Trump? Your state's restrictions will probably stay way ahead of anything coming out of DC.

As I have already answered in this thread. The president MUST support the entire BOR and Constitution. Bumpstocks was strike 1 his comments on suppressors of “I dont like them” is strike 2 & leads me to believe that if congress somehow got a bill to him banning them he would sign that as an effort of “good will”.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Buck Wild Racing]

Originally Posted by Landslide

Smack!

Yovanovitch communicated with Dem staffer on 'delicate' issue after complaint, emails show, despite testimony

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/mar...delicate-issue

You know that democrats are allowed to lie in testimony right?

[Landslide]

Originally Posted by thefishguy77

As I have already answered in this thread. The president MUST support the entire BOR and Constitution. Bumpstocks was strike 1 his comments on suppressors of “I dont like them” is strike 2 & leads me to believe that if congress somehow got a bill to him banning them he would sign that as an effort of “good will”.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

And who's your hero candidate supporting everything you want?

[Landslide]

Originally Posted by Buck Wild Racing

You know that democrats are allowed to lie in testimony right?

Sadly, yep

[Thepanzerfuhrer]

The Republicans may be growing a spine. Jim jorden got moved to the intelligence Committee so he can question witnesses.

[reddman]

Originally Posted by rockbuggy84

Go ahead and point us to all the “shady shit” that Trump IS doing. But we want factually proven evidence, so go ahead and leave “but the Dems said he did it” argument at the door.

There are sworn statements made under oath by plenty now stating that the congress and pentagon approved aid that by LAW had to be transferred was held up unless Ukraine made a public announcement announcing investigations into Biden, including from the Trump donor turned diplomat who suddenly remembered that he mistakenly swore oath repeatedly that there were preconditions for the money based on investigating the Bidens, only after several highly respected people testified that there were such preconditions. Read his "revised" statement. Funny how the threat of perjury due to conflicting testimony is the only thing that jogged his mind.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/05/u...ent-trump.html

Originally Posted by Buck Wild Racing

The president of the United States can withhold aid for any reason. Its part of his responsibility as head of foreign policy. This entire thing is fake. All of it.

Well, per a little document called the Constitution, "...no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State." And for context of what the founders meant by emoluments, here is what Edmund Randolf said at the Virginia Ratifying Convention about emoluments (defined as "advange or benefit", which dirt on your political rivals easily falls under) “[t]here is another provision against the danger… of the president receiving emoluments from foreign powers.…I consider, therefore, that he is restrained from receiving any present or emoluments whatever. It is impossible to guard better against corruption.”

While the Hunter Biden thing surely doesn't pass the smell test, you and I both know that Trumps sudden interest in this right before the election is damn well related to the election. Per Ukraine, who already investigated this: “Biden was definitely not involved,” Lutsenko said. “We do not have any grounds to think that there was any wrongdoing starting from 2014.” Hannity and two thirds of Fox isn't news, it's opinion, slanted opinion at that.

[reddman]

Odd how the only corruption that Trump has ever pursued just happens to be his most likely political rival just prior to an election. He has had 2 full years of full Republican control over the Federal government, having the Presidency, Senate, and the House, yet he has been the eternal "victim" of a government somehow biased against him. If there was so much easily proven corruption by the prior administration, why were they unable to substantiate any of it while in complete control of all the levers of government?

I hated the Trump/Clinton option in 2016, and frankly if I had to pick what I thought was the lesser of two evils, I was somewhat relieved that he won rather than her. After nearly 3 years, he has managed to be even more self serving than I had feared. I'm not anti-Trump, I am against corruption. edit: But if you look at the actual evidence and click away from Fox and Brietbart for a minute, you'll see that most his claims have been debunked. That is what I was referring to as "shady shit" earlier. Spreading false conspiracy theories is shady by my book.

[Buck Wild Racing]

Originally Posted by reddman

Well, per a little document called the Constitution, "...no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State." And for context of what the founders meant by emoluments, here is what Edmund Randolf said at the Virginia Ratifying Convention about emoluments (defined as "advange or benefit", which dirt on your political rivals easily falls under) “[t]here is another provision against the danger… of the president receiving emoluments from foreign powers.…I consider, therefore, that he is restrained from receiving any present or emoluments whatever. It is impossible to guard better against corruption.”

While the Hunter Biden thing surely doesn't pass the smell test, you and I both know that Trumps sudden interest in this right before the election is damn well related to the election. Per Ukraine, who already investigated this: “Biden was definitely not involved,” Lutsenko said. “We do not have any grounds to think that there was any wrongdoing starting from 2014.” Hannity and two thirds of Fox isn't news, it's opinion, slanted opinion at that.

The reason that nobody, even on the left, is citing this as a reason for the impeachment is because it is WAY too far fetched to even try to bring up. Did Obama benefit politically from the Iran Deal? Yes. And he used tremendous amounts of money to accomplish it. So? Would Trump benefit from finding the origin of the Russia Hoax? Oh hell yeah, so? Presidents are allowed to ask for this stuff. It's why Obama did and nobody cared. Sorry. I know you don't like Trump. But that's why we have elections.

One day you may look around a realize that you were anti democracy because you didn't like its outcome.

[Buck Wild Racing]

Originally Posted by reddman

Odd how the only corruption that Trump has ever pursued just happens to be his most likely political rival just prior to an election. He has had 2 full years of full Republican control over the Federal government, having the Presidency, Senate, and the House, yet he has been the eternal "victim" of a government somehow biased against him. If there was so much easily proven corruption by the prior administration, why were they unable to substantiate any of it while in complete control of all the levers of government?

I hated the Trump/Clinton option in 2016, and frankly if I had to pick what I thought was the lesser of two evils, I was somewhat relieved that he won rather than her. After nearly 3 years, he has managed to be even more self serving than I had feared. I'm not anti-Trump, I am against corruption. edit: But if you look at the actual evidence and click away from Fox and Brietbart for a minute, you'll see that most his claims have been debunked. That is what I was referring to as "shady shit" earlier. Spreading false conspiracy theories is shady by my book.

He's allowed to do that. Sorry.

[waterhorse]

Originally Posted by reddman

1.Odd how the only corruption that Trump has ever pursued just happens to be his most likely political rival just prior to an election.

2.After nearly 3 years, he has managed to be even more self serving than I had feared.

1. I think it's odd how the only scandals with Trump are about election. Scandals with the previous administration are the kind that make them money illegally.

2. Self serving? What has he done that benefits him? I guess he made the economy the best ever and that helped him. Most everything else he did only helped us.