"This is a coverup"

originally posted by: Wayfarer

originally posted by: Krakatoa

originally posted by: Wayfarer

originally posted by: shooterbrody

originally posted by: Wayfarer
Golly its weird then how even Republican lawyers and legal experts are saying Trump is proper #ed.

why then has there been no floor vote to actually begin impeachment?

weird right?

Not weird at all. The relevant committee's will dig into the details first (as is expected).

After their more important vacation though. Seems impeaching a traitorous president is less important than taking a personal vacation.

Yeah, they are acting like it's a serious matter. Please.....don't pee on my head and tell me its raining.

Vacation? That's the first I've heard of it. Pray-tell where you got that info?

Check out the Congressional calendar for the first week of November HERE. They are not in session, but in recess for "District Work Period". If we are now supposed to "read between the lines" then this is their vacation time away from Congress to do "work" in their district. Remember, the words are irrelevant now, you have to interpret what they mean, which is not the same as the overt words you see. That is acceptable now, right?

a reply to: Wayfarer

I still want Trump impeached/removed, not because I'm sour over losing, but because I think he's really really bad for our country

too bad that is not a crime
were you to cheer for that for an actual crime we may be in agreement
the fact that you want a duly elected official removed without said crime is sad

I picked trump not because he was the best but because he was not her
had she been elected I would not be cheering for her being put through what he is

what the dems are doing is actually dangerous, sorry sour grapes wont let you see that

a reply to: Krakatoa

I just stumbled upon it as you were posting this reply I think.

Seems they're canceling the recess though because of the importance of this situation....

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Wayfarer

I still want Trump impeached/removed, not because I'm sour over losing, but because I think he's really really bad for our country

too bad that is not a crime
were you to cheer for that for an actual crime we may be in agreement
the fact that you want a duly elected official removed without said crime is sad

I picked trump not because he was the best but because he was not her
had she been elected I would not be cheering for her being put through what he is

what the dems are doing is actually dangerous, sorry sour grapes wont let you see that

No you misunderstand me. I am one of my aforementioned Democrat/Liberals who believe the president committed a crime. I want him removed because he committed that crime (which is what I am referencing when I say he is really really bad for the country).

If Trump committed no crime, I'd still dislike him just as much, I just wouldn't be pushing for impeachment (but rather getting him out in 2020). Since we both know he's not getting impeached, I will accept that the minimum consequence of his (in my opinion) criminal actions the damaging of his campaign/re-election chances.

originally posted by: Wayfarer
Well its subjective. I and many (if not most) Democrats/Liberals view what the president did as heinously criminal. In the same but opposite vein, many Republicans/Conservatives don't see anything wrong with what the president did.

From the liberal side, Justice won't be served because the Republicans hold the keys to the hammer (so-to-speak), so the next best thing is to diminish his ability to wield power. From the Conservative side its all just a political ploy because liberals are butt-hurt over losing the election still and will stop at nothing to remove Trump.

For what its worth, I totally own my 'side' losing the election in 2016. We lost completely and utterly. I still want Trump impeached/removed, not because I'm sour over losing, but because I think he's really really bad for our country.I think that's probably pretty close to the same reasons why many folks disliked Hillary/Obama/whatever past Democrat president.

In response to the bolded sentenct above, I guess you and your fellow democrats do not think you can remove him form office legally (the same way he was elected to office) by voting your best candidate into office in 2020. So, you need to do it using lies, innuendo, and baseless accusations to muck up the works, resist by any means necessary? So, doing all that is GOOD for our country how? It is dividing this country like has never been in at least 100 years.

Do you not see beyond your hatred that this is shoving a wedge sooo deeply between the population that it is doing more damage to the country than anything the president can do? Seriously?

You think that type of resistance it GOOD??

Put away the hatred, it will eat you up inside.

originally posted by: YouSir
a reply to: Sillyolme


Ummm...since when is hearsay evidence admissible...anywhere...?

Since when is disgruntled rumormongering...considered evidence...?

YouSir

Kavanaugh hearing for $1000, Alex.

a reply to: Wayfarer
prey tell what crime?
also do you think such rises to the level of "high crimes and misdemeanors"?

oh, and I do think the house dems are crazy enough to impeach trump without clear cut evidence of a crime committed

originally posted by: Wayfarer
a reply to: Krakatoa

I just stumbled upon it as you were posting this reply I think.

Seems they're canceling the recess though because of the importance of this situation....

Yup...news to me too. Thanks for the update. I guess it was "bad optics" to do it, so they decided to stay. Good for them I say. Lets have a vote though...oh, that's right, you need all of Congress for that. But only the house intelligence committee-members are staying. I guess they can spin that as caring to the uneducated now and clean those optics.


SMH

This looks like another media attack like the fake dossier the DNC produced. Even the president of the Ukraine, Zelenski says their was nothing to the dems allegations.

originally posted by: Krakatoa

originally posted by: Wayfarer
Well its subjective. I and many (if not most) Democrats/Liberals view what the president did as heinously criminal. In the same but opposite vein, many Republicans/Conservatives don't see anything wrong with what the president did.

From the liberal side, Justice won't be served because the Republicans hold the keys to the hammer (so-to-speak), so the next best thing is to diminish his ability to wield power. From the Conservative side its all just a political ploy because liberals are butt-hurt over losing the election still and will stop at nothing to remove Trump.

For what its worth, I totally own my 'side' losing the election in 2016. We lost completely and utterly. I still want Trump impeached/removed, not because I'm sour over losing, but because I think he's really really bad for our country.I think that's probably pretty close to the same reasons why many folks disliked Hillary/Obama/whatever past Democrat president.

In response to the bolded sentenct above, I guess you and your fellow democrats do not think you can remove him form office legally (the same way he was elected to office) by voting your best candidate into office in 2020. So, you need to do it using lies, innuendo, and baseless accusations to muck up the works, resist by any means necessary? So, doing all that is GOOD for our country how? It is dividing this country like has never been in at least 100 years.

Do you not see beyond your hatred that this is shoving a wedge sooo deeply between the population that it is doing more damage to the country than anything the president can do? Seriously?

You think that type of resistance it GOOD??

Put away the hatred, it will eat you up inside.

Uh I think resisting a criminal president is our duty as citizens of the country. As for how that resistance looks, I'm not for armed resistance or violent action in any way. If he's found to be a criminal, I'd prefer that everyone unanimously removes him because we don't like our country to be run by criminals, but understandable when those holding the reins of power have something to lose by going after a criminal serving in their interest it becomes incumbent upon whomever has the ability to leverage whatever can be leveraged against said criminal. In this case, impeachment while supremely unlikely to remove the man prior to 2020 can still serve as a vehicle for limiting the power and breath of what a criminal in power can accomplish.

I still believe that ultimately Trump will be president at least until 2020, and I'm not so naive as to assume there still isn't a good chance he will be re-elected regardless.

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Wayfarer
prey tell what crime?
also do you think such rises to the level of "high crimes and misdemeanors"?

oh, and I do think the house dems are crazy enough to impeach trump without clear cut evidence of a crime committed

I do think that he violated the public's trust by leveraging national funds to serve as bribery for foreign interference against his political rivals, which itself would constitute a high crime or misdemeanor. I think he's taken advantage of his power/position for personal gain and has run afoul of the separation of powers by thwarting the distribution of congressionally approved military aid.

originally posted by: Wayfarer

originally posted by: Krakatoa

originally posted by: Wayfarer
Well its subjective. I and many (if not most) Democrats/Liberals view what the president did as heinously criminal. In the same but opposite vein, many Republicans/Conservatives don't see anything wrong with what the president did.

From the liberal side, Justice won't be served because the Republicans hold the keys to the hammer (so-to-speak), so the next best thing is to diminish his ability to wield power. From the Conservative side its all just a political ploy because liberals are butt-hurt over losing the election still and will stop at nothing to remove Trump.

For what its worth, I totally own my 'side' losing the election in 2016. We lost completely and utterly. I still want Trump impeached/removed, not because I'm sour over losing, but because I think he's really really bad for our country.I think that's probably pretty close to the same reasons why many folks disliked Hillary/Obama/whatever past Democrat president.

In response to the bolded sentenct above, I guess you and your fellow democrats do not think you can remove him form office legally (the same way he was elected to office) by voting your best candidate into office in 2020. So, you need to do it using lies, innuendo, and baseless accusations to muck up the works, resist by any means necessary? So, doing all that is GOOD for our country how? It is dividing this country like has never been in at least 100 years.

Do you not see beyond your hatred that this is shoving a wedge sooo deeply between the population that it is doing more damage to the country than anything the president can do? Seriously?

You think that type of resistance it GOOD??

Put away the hatred, it will eat you up inside.

Uh I think resisting a criminal president is our duty as citizens of the country. As for how that resistance looks, I'm not for armed resistance or violent action in any way. If he's found to be a criminal, I'd prefer that everyone unanimously removes him because we don't like our country to be run by criminals, but understandable when those holding the reins of power have something to lose by going after a criminal serving in their interest it becomes incumbent upon whomever has the ability to leverage whatever can be leveraged against said criminal. In this case, impeachment while supremely unlikely to remove the man prior to 2020 can still serve as a vehicle for limiting the power and breath of what a criminal in power can accomplish.

I still believe that ultimately Trump will be president at least until 2020, and I'm not so naive as to assume there still isn't a good chance he will be re-elected regardless.

You said in your opening statement,

Uh I think resisting a criminal president is our duty as citizens of the country.

So, what crimes? How is he a criminal?
Russia collusion (collusion, which is not a crime, but I'll give you that one) = NO
Obstruction of Justice = NO
Campaign finance violations = NO


So, just because you do not like someone does NOT give you any right to call them criminals. Baseless accusations like that should be reserved for the 15th century witch trials. Have we not learned ANYTHING in 600 years that innocent until proven guilty by due process and the presentation of actual evidence that can be investigated and questioned by both sides is NOT the same as GUILTY until proven innocent.

Again I implore you, put away the hatred. I mean that sincerely.

originally posted by: Wayfarer

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Wayfarer
prey tell what crime?
also do you think such rises to the level of "high crimes and misdemeanors"?

oh, and I do think the house dems are crazy enough to impeach trump without clear cut evidence of a crime committed

I do think that he violated the public's trust by leveraging national funds to serve as bribery for foreign interference against his political rivals, which itself would constitute a high crime or misdemeanor. I think he's taken advantage of his power/position for personal gain and has run afoul of the separation of powers by thwarting the distribution of congressionally approved military aid.

Are you talking about the former Vice President of the United States, Joe Biden and his dealings to get his son from being investigated? Or for having a son of the Vice President of the United States on the board of directors of a Ukrainian Energy Company that has dealing with the United States and accepts military aid?

Are you talking about those type of actions?

this is Kavannaugh 2.5.

think about it, how do you Accuse sommeone and not let them defend themselves from the accused?

a "whistleblower"

the "accuser" cannot be revealed yet must be belived (she must be believed)

they admit it's second hand, and they have "testimony" of "concerns".

The concerns were not big enough for the person with it to complain, no they all

complianed to the same person. How would all these disperate people know to all tell the same

unknown person. That is not odd at all is it??

and that one person, whom all these persons complained too, just happened to be from the CIA.

How coincidental, what are the odds?

YOU TELL ME!

originally posted by: Krakatoa

So, what crimes? How is he a criminal?

I listed what I believed his crimes were in my post reply to shooterbrody above.

originally posted by: Krakatoa

originally posted by: Wayfarer

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Wayfarer
prey tell what crime?
also do you think such rises to the level of "high crimes and misdemeanors"?

oh, and I do think the house dems are crazy enough to impeach trump without clear cut evidence of a crime committed

I do think that he violated the public's trust by leveraging national funds to serve as bribery for foreign interference against his political rivals, which itself would constitute a high crime or misdemeanor. I think he's taken advantage of his power/position for personal gain and has run afoul of the separation of powers by thwarting the distribution of congressionally approved military aid.

Are you talking about the former Vice President of the United States, Joe Biden and his dealings to get his son from being investigated? Or for having a son of the Vice President of the United States on the board of directors of a Ukrainian Energy Company that has dealing with the United States and accepts military aid?

Are you talking about those type of actions?

Doh woops I guess I posted the first reply to you too soon

The Hunter Biden info you've listed is not true/correct. Joe Biden called for the prosecutor to be removed, who coincidentally was protecting Hunter Biden's Ukrainian boss and his business. Kind of the opposite of what you've stated. To put it more accurately you're asking why we're not all outraged that Biden Fired the prosecutor who wasn't going after his son enough....

originally posted by: thedigirati

the "accuser" cannot be revealed yet must be belived (she must be believed)

Nobody has to believe the whistleblower. They conveniently pointed is right in the direction of Trumps literal 'TOP SECRET CRIME SERVER'....

I'd imagine that has more than enough evidence.

a reply to: Krakatoa


I find it credible.

a reply to: Wayfarer

I do think that he violated the public's trust

If that were an actual crime a lot of officials would be behind bars.

The rest of what you listed, I can think of the last 4 presidents have done similar with no threats of impeachment.

The fact that the people didnt want her does not make him a criminal.

a reply to: Wayfarer


Didn't recently uncovered evidence just reveal quotes from the Ukrainian prosecutor saying he WAS fired for investigating Biden's son and Burisma?