Looks like Burisma will be the lynch pin for two impeachments

a reply to: Threadbare
My god. Your boy is on video bragging about it!

m.youtube.com...

Well son of a bitch, he’s a crook!

P
A
T
H
E
T
I
C

Even if it would turn out the Bidens were Chinese spies these people would 100% find an excuse to dismiss the reality while at the same time regurgitating that we condone everything Trump says and does. 🤦🏻‍♂️

a reply to: ElitePlebeian

stupid is as stupid does ma'am.

Those with high political rank or connections will not receive more than a slap on the wrist. There is an amazingly great article on this which puts the situation in perspective: theupheaval.substack.com... ss Do yourself a favor and read it.

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: Threadbare
a reply to: DBCowboy

You seem to be missing my point. The GOP claim that Biden was bribed by Zlochevsky to pressure Ukraine into removing Shokin because of an investigation he was running into Burisma.

Except that whole narrative falls apart when you realize that Shokin wasn't running an investigation into Burisma and that he was ultimately forced to resign because of his failure to prosecute oligarchs like Zlochevsky for corruption.

why was Hunter on the board?

hunter put on board for classified papers at joes house

a reply to: PurpleFox

Who isn't a crook playing quid pro quo nowadays?

Can't stand Jim Breuer though. Probably a good guy, just dislike his comedy.

originally posted by: Halfswede
a reply to: network dude
Considering Joe then made the famous call, "and son of a b__ch, he was fired", it doesn't take Sherlock Holmes to figure out that the influence worked. The Big Guy literally bragged about it without shame.

Some will claim that is just some wild coincidence. SMH

I agree that video of Biden’s “ well son of a brich “ is very suspect.

originally posted by: Turquosie
a reply to: PurpleFox

Who isn't a crook playing quid pro quo nowadays?

Can't stand Jim Breuer though. Probably a good guy, just dislike his comedy.

Trump was impeached over it, so at least at one point it was a big deal. Perhaps not so much now that he's not president.

a reply to: Turquosie

Ive noticed in the past and starting now in the present, when confronted with corruption in their party, the fallback position is 'well, all politicians are crooked'.

It's a copout.

And it's not a defense.

Do you think RFK Jr. is a crook? DId you believe that of Sanders?

a reply to: CoyoteAngels

You're right. I don't mean to cop out of corruption allegations by saying it's all politicians, because its not. It's just hard to not have apathy these days when so many politicians, who are corrupt or complete baffoons, constantly get elected.

If most of the population don't really care about electing the best man/woman for job, and vote based on wedge issues and party, apathy starts to set in.

I mean here we are in 2023, considering electing Trump or Biden again after all the shenanigans and allegations of corruption.

a reply to: Turquosie

I can remember my parents and grandparents and their political arguments. My mother never said much and my dad always told her how to vote. I always figured she voted to cancel his, just because he made a big deal about how she better not. She was passive aggresive.

My grandfather was a democrat and the worst racist I ever knew. My father was college educated in engineering and voted republican. My grandmother was embarrassed by my grandfathers racism and voted republican also, but she couldn't stand Nixon.

I realized somewhere along the line, that people vote like playing ponies. Everyone has a method. Some ponder over the racing form and place a well educated, logical bet. Some like the horses name or the jocky. Some bet by number. Some wait till the last minute and see the horses. Grandma always bet on the grey or the dappled.

We spend so much time trying to convince one another and really, nobody knows what happens in the booth.

a reply to: CoyoteAngels

Perhaps we could do some kind of test. People will have to awnser questions after doing light reading on each candidate. The candidates will have PROs vs CONs. The candidate will write their own PROs (why one should vote for them and what the promise to do when elected).

CONs will be written by their opponents and approved by a committe. Reasons why one should not vote for this person.

Then the voter will have to take a short test to show they have read this information.

I'm sure there would be even better ways. But I think if people want to get rid of, or reduce the power of the electoral college, then people will have to show they are educated enough on who they are voting for.

Voting should be a privledge to those who pay attention and not simply a right.

Secondly, all parties should be abolished. Everyone runs independent. That way people can't just vote red or blue down the line.

a reply to: Turquosie

Literacy tests to vote were found unconstitutional long ago.

People have freedom of association by the 1st amendment. Political parties are an example of that.