Jump to content

Bi-Partisan Support For Impeachment


Recommended Posts

If the Left felt that they could beat him next November they would not be pushing for this fake impeachment. They have emptied their clip and are now throwing their gun at him. Trump has had many successes and is living up to his campaign promises. This was without a honeymoon of any kind but raging headwinds created by the Left. Time after time after time the Left has come up with amateur attempts to bring him down. It hasn't and it won't work. Get ready you snowflakes for 5 more years of President Trump.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, njbuff said:

Meanwhile, the infrastructure across our land needs a major upgrade, but who cares about that.

 

Impeaching a President 63 million people voted for is more important.

 

I said the same thing when they did this to Clinton, even though there was way more evidence back then against Clinton than there is against Trump now, and I ended up despising Republicans for it.

 

Anyways, I didn’t like it then and I don’t like it now.

 

Is this going to be the new norm in this country, impeaching a President because you don’t like him?

 

Pass a fvcking bill instead of worrying about impeachment.


 Clinton committed perjury before a grand jury and violated the civil rights of a US citizen 

 

that fully deserved impeachment, it did not deserve conviction in the Senate, and was dealt with incredibly just methods

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, pop gun said:

Schiff needs to be arrested for defamation and slander of Trump, Schiff is a really horrible person.

 

Schiff has immunity.  Members of Congress get blanket immunity for statements made in their official capacity, in order to prevent exactly what you're advocating: political persecution using the justice system of Congressional opposition to the executive 

Edited by DC Tom
Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

Schiff has immunity.  Members of Congress get planket immunity for statements made in their official capacity, in order to prevent exactly what you're advocating: political persecution using the justice system of Congressional opposition to the executive 


Thank god for the planket immunity doctrine

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Tiberius said:

Dream on! You guys got this piece of garbage over the goal line once with Russian help, not going to happen again. 

 

I mean seriously, what’s he going to run on? Infrastructure? Health care? Tax cuts? Tariff wars? Nope 

 

 

He can run counter to everything your side is pitching and he'll have a decent platform. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, keepthefaith said:

 

He can run counter to everything your side is pitching and he'll have a decent platform. 

I don’t think that’s true at all. He said he was going to do all those things and has not delivered much of anything. He will still get the “lock her up crowd” and the build the stupid wall crowd, but that won’t do it. 

 

55% of Americans think he should be impeached. How do you build a electoral victory with that? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Tiberius said:

I don’t think that’s true at all. He said he was going to do all those things and has not delivered much of anything. He will still get the “lock her up crowd” and the build the stupid wall crowd, but that won’t do it. 

 

55% of Americans think he should be impeached. How do you build a electoral victory with that? 

 

...according to unpublished reports, they SOLELY polled YOUR relatives................

  • Haha (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, row_33 said:


 Clinton committed perjury before a grand jury and violated the civil rights of a US citizen 

 

that fully deserved impeachment, it did not deserve conviction in the Senate, and was dealt with incredibly just methods

 

 


I’m not here to defend Bill Clinton, but you can’t deny that his impeachment fractured this country the way this impeachment process is also, all the while Trump hasn’t been convicted of anything in a court of law, just the court of the left’s public opinion.

22 minutes ago, OldTimeAFLGuy said:

 

...according to unpublished reports, they SOLELY polled YOUR relatives................


He must have pulled that POLE out of his azz. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, njbuff said:


I’m not here to defend Bill Clinton, but you can’t deny that his impeachment fractured this country the way this impeachment process is also, all the while Trump hasn’t been convicted of anything in a court of law, just the court of the left’s public opinion.


He must have pulled that POLE out of his azz. 

...the one he "dances on"?...just askin'.............

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said:

:lol: 

 

 

That's an understatement.

Did you read that article? He basically confirmed the whole Quid pro quo thing. At best he says that he didn't believe what was done was illegal(doesn't mean he's right) but he also says he didn't know what Barisma was or what the investigation was.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Warcodered said:

Did you read that article? He basically confirmed the whole Quid pro quo thing. At best he says that he didn't believe what was done was illegal(doesn't mean he's right) but he also says he didn't know what Barisma was or what the investigation was.

 

Quid pro quo is dead. 

 

Zelinsky denies it. The transcript disproves it. And every witness has been unable to confirm it -- including the above. 

 

This is all smoke -- pushed by the very same people who lied to your face about Trump/Russia for three years. 

  • Like (+1) 4
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

Quid pro quo is dead. 

 

Zelinsky denies it. The transcript disproves it. And every witness has been unable to confirm it -- including the above. 

 

This is all smoke -- pushed by the very same people who lied to your face about Trump/Russia for three years. 

In his testimony, Taylor recounted a conversation in which Morrison briefed him on another conversation between Ambassador Gordon Sondland and a top adviser to Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky. Taylor said Morrison informed him that Sondland, the U.S. ambassador to the European Union at the heart of the impeachment inquiry, told Zelensky-aide Andriy Yermak that U.S. security aid wouldn’t come until Zelensky publicly committed to an investigation into Burisma, the company on whose board Hunter Biden served.

That is not how Morrison remembers it. “My recollection is that Ambassador Sondland’s proposal to Yermak was that it could be sufficient if the new Ukrainian prosecutor general, not President Zelensky, would commit to pursue the Burisma investigation,” Morrison told impeachment investigators. 

 

Aid for investigation

Quid Pro Quo

I'll scratch your back if you scratch mine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Warcodered said:

In his testimony, Taylor recounted a conversation in which Morrison briefed him on another conversation between Ambassador Gordon Sondland and a top adviser to Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky. Taylor said Morrison informed him that Sondland, the U.S. ambassador to the European Union at the heart of the impeachment inquiry, told Zelensky-aide Andriy Yermak that U.S. security aid wouldn’t come until Zelensky publicly committed to an investigation into Burisma, the company on whose board Hunter Biden served.

That is not how Morrison remembers it. “My recollection is that Ambassador Sondland’s proposal to Yermak was that it could be sufficient if the new Ukrainian prosecutor general, not President Zelensky, would commit to pursue the Burisma investigation,” Morrison told impeachment investigators. 

 

Aid for investigation

Quid Pro Quo

I'll scratch your back if you scratch mine.

cool. so it's not a he said he said thing but a he heard a he said, he said, he said thing :thumbsup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Warcodered said:

In his testimony, Taylor recounted a conversation in which Morrison briefed him on another conversation between Ambassador Gordon Sondland and a top adviser to Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky. Taylor said Morrison informed him that Sondland, the U.S. ambassador to the European Union at the heart of the impeachment inquiry, told Zelensky-aide Andriy Yermak that U.S. security aid wouldn’t come until Zelensky publicly committed to an investigation into Burisma, the company on whose board Hunter Biden served.

That is not how Morrison remembers it. “My recollection is that Ambassador Sondland’s proposal to Yermak was that it could be sufficient if the new Ukrainian prosecutor general, not President Zelensky, would commit to pursue the Burisma investigation,” Morrison told impeachment investigators. 

 

Aid for investigation

Quid Pro Quo

I'll scratch your back if you scratch mine.

 

It's second (third) hand hearsay. 

 

The two people involved both deny it happened. The transcript of the call shows it did not happen.

 

That trumps hearsay. 

 

 

 

This is all it is, War: 

 

 

 

They TOLD you what they're going to do. Now they're doing it. Again. 


First with Russia. 

Now this. 

 

Neither will work.

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Awesome! (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...