Trump Impeachment Thread

a reply to: Gothmog

I was raised in a Democratic household, the True Blue days were different.

Listening the to the House argue their case, it is so far very very weak. I'm hearing the same exact things that were presented during the investigations and House vote, they are just re-ordering them to tell a version of the story. That version of the story sounds a lot more like they are afraid of him using the full power of the Executive Office in a way that few Presidents have ever exercised. They keep talking about "personal gain" and I just don't see it. The corruption in Ukraine extends way before Trump became POTUS, and there is most definitely evidence of "favors" exchanged by Biden and his son based on a few simple facts - Hunter had no matching job experience, did not speak the language, did not live in Ukraine, didn't visit the Ukrainian "office", got paid a sh*t ton of money. Everyone knows he wouldn't have had that job were it not for his father being in political power at the time. That along with evidence that Ukraine was used as a proxy by Russia to interfere with elections, is MORE than enough reason to withhold aid to check in to these things. I would have done exactly the same thing, especially if I were already pissed off about giving away so much of the US taxpayer money to other countries.

~Namaste

originally posted by: Bicent
I am not watching or following it I am busy working. It just appears to me to be a distraction. Trump, is not a good ole boy politician that is why he gets stuff done. Not being part of the clique, they are prejudice towards you. So here we have the impeachment.

Simple and eloquent.

I agree, he knows where all of the skeletons are buried and doesn't need favors for money.

They don't like it.

~Namaste

This is NOT the Mud Pit!!!

All rules for polite political debate will be enforced.
Reaffirming Our Desire For Productive Political Debate (REVISED)
Please read new threads.
No Political Trolling.....either in words or images.
Is There Civilization Without Civility

You are responsible for your own posts.....those who ignore that responsibility will face mod actions.


and, as always:

Do NOT reply to this post!!

originally posted by: DontTreadOnMe

This is NOT the Mud Pit!!!

All rules for polite political debate will be enforced.
Reaffirming Our Desire For Productive Political Debate (REVISED)
Please read new threads.
No Political Trolling.....either in words or images.
Is There Civilization Without Civility

You are responsible for your own posts.....those who ignore that responsibility will face mod actions.


and, as always:

Do NOT reply to this post!!

Shiff looks like and absolute idiot.

He just went on a rant about things he could have introduced in the house....

Now they called a dinner break!?!?!?

Better hurry up and get this dangerous man out of office after sitting on impeachment for a 40 days!

🤪lolz

You guys are the best!

a reply to: SonOfTheLawOfOne

It's about the withholding of any corroborative, material evidence by the White House regime, at the behest of the President himself.
inculpatory evidence is a tendency of guilt, and a prosecuting party should show any such evidence...if they have it
In this case, it is Trump himself who was able to withhold such evidence by the power of his position.

The case is tight, but his withholding of such corroborative material evidence, which is known to exist deprives the prosecution of something that should have been given in the first instance.


This post is saved.

The "Prosecution" is showing how well versed they are on all the House hearings that produced a 100% mix of innuendo, lies, speculation, 2nd hand testimony, 3rd hand testimony, Shakespeare style acting along with total jive turkey talk 🥳 🦚

originally posted by: xuenchen
The "Prosecution" is showing how well versed they are on all the House hearings that produced a 100% mix of innuendo, lies, speculation, 2nd hand testimony, 3rd hand testimony, Shakespeare style acting along with total jive turkey talk 🥳 🦚

This is correct!

Shiff wants Mulvaney, let's put sleepy joe on the stand if Shiff wants new witnesses. We are talking about 1 billion dollars that his family has stolen...

Lolz🤪

a reply to: Scepticaldem

Who was out of line in your partisan opinion?

Apparently the use of "Shifty" instead of "Schiff" is partisan.. Spell check don't tread on me...

originally posted by: smurfy
a reply to: SonOfTheLawOfOne

It's about the withholding of any corroborative, material evidence by the White House regime, at the behest of the President himself.
inculpatory evidence is a tendency of guilt, and a prosecuting party should show any such evidence...if they have it
In this case, it is Trump himself who was able to withhold such evidence by the power of his position.

The case is tight, but his withholding of such corroborative material evidence, which is known to exist deprives the prosecution of something that should have been given in the first instance.

What is he hiding? You have any proof?

No?

Schiff is hiding his relationship with the guy that murders black male prostitutes. Been on the news 4 times.

Can you prove his innocence?

Lolz🤪

The expert has spoken........😆

Adam Schiff Tells Senate: Alan Dershowitz Not a ‘Reputable Constitutional Law Expert’

House impeachment manager Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) tried to dismiss Harvard Law School professor emeritus Alan Dershowitz as not a “reputable constitutional law expert.”

Schiff did not respond directly to the White House argument that “abuse of power” was not an impeachable offense according to the U.S. Constitution. Instead, he targeted Dershowitz, whom he said was responsible for that argument.

nothing like making up your mind at something as important as an Impeachment Trial eh 🤣


Adam Schiff Says ‘Evidence Is Overwhelming’ Yet Calls for More Witnesses, Documents

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff (D-CA) said during a press conference Tuesday that the evidence is already “overwhelming” that President Trump abused the power of his office and obstructed Congress but argued that the Senate should allow House Democrats to introduce more evidence.

Democrats: "We have overwhelmingly evidence and it clearly shows the president is guilty and more dangerous than any other president ever... if any one of you doesn't vote in our favor with the overwhelmingly evidence we have than you are not only part of the coverup but will forever damage our country... we would like you to gather more evidence"

out of context is an old trick and effective until somebody calls it out as BS.

like this for example... 😃

Fact Check: No, President Trump Did Not Say Article II Gave Him Absolute Power

CLAIM: President Donald Trump believes that he has absolute power under Article II of the U.S. Constitution and must therefore be impeached.

VERDICT: False. Trump was talking specifically about the power to fire Robert Mueller.
The House impeachment managers — all Democrats — argued Tuesday at the start of Trump’s impeachment trial in the Senate that Trump believed that Article II of the Constitution meant he can do “whatever I want.” Both Reps. Adam Schiff (D-CA) and Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) presented deceptively edited video that cur out the context of Trump’s words.

Hakeem Jeffries just said there's all kinds of damning evidence of Trump abuse of power yet says there's a cover-up in progress ?? 🤓

Well duh 🥳

a reply to: SonOfTheLawOfOne
The last True Democrat passed with Teddy.

originally posted by: DanDanDat
Democrats: "We have overwhelmingly evidence and it clearly shows the president is guilty and more dangerous than any other president ever... if any one of you doesn't vote in our favor with the overwhelmingly evidence we have than you are not only part of the coverup but will forever damage our country... we would like you to gather more evidence"

Who in the world still believes anything adam Schiff says?

He opens his eyes really big when he wants you to believe what he is saying....

This guy is a complete joker

Lolz🤪