Jump to content

The Sham Impeachment Inquiry & Whistleblower Saga: A Race to Get Ahead of the OIG


Recommended Posts

53 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said:


I'm not even bothering to watch. This is predetermined, so why give them the air time? 

I gotta tell ya, politics is an ugly business. There is no way I could ever be a politician. As the Democrats are manufacturing some impeachment nonsense, Trump and the House are also doing defense funding (including space force), the USMCA is about to be ratified, and now they all have to work together to avoid another government shutdown, and they will! I could not do it. I could not work with people who have threatened my family, lied about me, and made my job as difficult as possible for the last three years. And not even for some great philosophical reason - such as making the United States a better place! Oh no, this all comes down to money.  The graft-machine has been cut off by President Trump, and the howling monkeys in Congress just do not like that. 

And this also has made me question... if 'everyone' knows this impeachment nonsense goes nowhere, and they are all continuing to work on funding bills (and other legislation), why do it? Bread and circus for their base? Make Trump miserable? Distracting from the OIG findings (regardless of the press trying to play the "mistakes were made" card, that report was damning for (ex) top-tier FBI officials)?  Distracting from possible Durham/Barr indictments? 

 

  Politics are pretty dirty on the local level as well.  A cousin was approached to run for a town highway supervisor office and declined as he knew he was expected to let equipment out of the building for those who supported him in running to use in their own businesses had he won.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

It really isn’t supposed to be like this but this is what happens when one side simply  won’t accept the results of an election.

 

I demand to see the birth certificate of candidates I don't like. 

 

Trump acted badly and not how I want my executive to act. He deserves to be slapped around. Impeachment, especially one doomed to fail, is a massive waste of what could otherwise be useful energy. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

It really isn’t supposed to be like this but this is what happens when one side simply  won’t accept the results of an election.

 

The Republicans impeached Bill Clinton over far more frivolous means because they hated him so much. Trump admitted to various acts that violated laws and if the Dems were smart could get him on violations of emoluments too. It turns out politics is a dirty business.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, John Adams said:

 

I demand to see the birth certificate of candidates I don't like. 

 

Trump acted badly and not how I want my executive to act. He deserves to be slapped around. Impeachment, especially one doomed to fail, is a massive waste of what could otherwise be useful energy. 

You do realize Trump wasn’t in elected office when he wanted to see the birth certificate, right? Man that’s weak!

Just now, billsfan89 said:

 

The Republicans impeached Bill Clinton over far more frivolous means because they hated him so much. Trump admitted to various acts that violated laws and if the Dems were smart could get him on violations of emoluments too. It turns out politics is a dirty business.

Clinton was guilty as sin! He lost his law license. Geez this is getting to be silly!

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

2 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

You do realize Trump wasn’t in elected office when he wanted to see the birth certificate, right? Man that’s weak!

 

I wasn't referring to Trump except that he was also a birther when he didn't like Obama's election. 

 

So that answered your observation, "It really isn’t supposed to be like this but this is what happens when one side simply  won’t accept the results of an election."

Edited by John Adams
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, John Adams said:

 

I wasn't referring to Trump except that he was also a birther when he didn't like Obama's election. 

 

So that answered your observation, "It really isn’t supposed to be like this but this is what happens when one side simply  won’t accept the results of an election."

Oh brother. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, John Adams said:

 

I demand to see the birth certificate of candidates I don't like. 

 

Trump acted badly and not how I want my executive to act. He deserves to be slapped around. Impeachment, especially one doomed to fail, is a massive waste of what could otherwise be useful energy. 

ahh but it is not a total waste, the Dems are going to pay dearly at the voting booth for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, billsfan89 said:

 

The Republicans impeached Bill Clinton over far more frivolous means because they hated him so much. Trump admitted to various acts that violated laws and if the Dems were smart could get him on violations of emoluments too. It turns out politics is a dirty business.


then republicans voted against conviction in the Senate

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

 

Clinton was guilty as sin! He lost his law license. Geez this is getting to be silly!

 

I thought the Clinton impeachment was woefully silly...but at leas

t it met an evidentiary stabdard greater than fourth-hand gossip.

  • Like (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, DC Tom said:

 

I thought the Clinton impeachment was woefully silly...but at leas

t it met an evidentiary stabdard greater than fourth-hand gossip.

 

yes, convicted of perjury before a grand jury, while the President, is a 100% level of evidence

 

 

Edited by row_33
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, billsfan89 said:

 

The Republicans impeached Bill Clinton over far more frivolous means because they hated him so much. Trump admitted to various acts that violated laws and if the Dems were smart could get him on violations of emoluments too. It turns out politics is a dirty business.

 

It was a bad idea then.  It is a bad idea now.

I don't think comparing whether the charges are frivolous or not is relevant.  I will say that this "Obstruction of Congress" article is absolutely stupid.  Schiff said what Trump is doing (regarding obstruction) in "unprecedented" but I recall a prior administration ignoring and blowing off Congressional subpoenas..  I also think that if the Democrats in Congress say that this is an "investigation" up until now, then they can't complain that the person they're investigating didn't HELP them.  How stupid is that??  One of the "legal experts" said in his testimony last week that it isn't "obstruction" of anything until a Court requires Trump to produce evidence and witnesses.

 

They were talking about why there are only two Articles.  The reason is that Pelosi couldn't get support for more charges from her Democrat Members in districts that are on shaky ground for re-election.  And don't you think that they would have tried emoluments, or Trump Foundation, or Russian hoax, or ANYTHING a lot earlier if they had anything to stick on him?

 

As it is, these two Articles are weak.  No reason to put more weak charges on top.

 

 

 

 

 

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

36 minutes ago, Foxx said:

ahh but it is not a total waste, the Dems are going to pay dearly at the voting booth for it.

 

I expect Trump will lose by a larger margin in the popular and win by about the same in the electoral. 

 

The big wins would come in Congress where Rs are coming out to vote for Trump and cast straight ballots. I haven't paid enough attention to what seats are up yet in the Senate. The big D turnout may help them. 

Edited by John Adams
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Foxx said:

ahh but it is not a total waste, the Dems are going to pay dearly at the voting booth for it.

 

Honestly, I think they're thinking that (1) they may lose some House seats but not the majority; and (2) they may pick up some Senate seats because they can play on the fact that Trump won't get convicted, and (3) some strange thing happens and the Senate convicts.

 

And I don't think Pelosi is fully on board, but she's being pushed.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said:

Has anyone seen the schedule so that we know when the House Judicial Minority Hearing is? 

 

That was the first thing I thought of when I heard the news this morning.

How awful is it that Congress can issue an Article for obstructing their investigation when they don't even follow their own rules.

 

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

×
×
  • Create New...