- Joined
- May 25, 2018
- Messages
- 7,109
- Reaction score
- 4,790
- Location
- Lebanon Oregon
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
This comment is a lie. I never said "criminal collusion", nor did I ever hint at it. Why are you posting lies?
All I've said is that there was collusion. Which there was. I'm guessing the fact you're now posting obvious lies about what I said shows that you know I'm right and you were wrong.
I never said anything about criminal collusion at all.
Are you really trying to knock down a strawman based on YOUR false statements?
Do you even know what conversation we are having?
Why are you posting obvious lies about my position? My entire position has simply been that the Trump campaign colluded with Russia. Which they did. If you were ignorant of the fact that collusion was not only criminal in nature, then that's a you problem. But it doesn't change the fact I've been right the entire time and I've exposed you as either being incredibly ignorant to the definition of the word "collusion" or outright posting lies about the actions of the Trump campaign.
So, which is it? Were you ignorant or were you posting lies?
This comment is a lie. I never said "criminal collusion", nor did I ever hint at it. Why are you posting lies?
All I've said is that there was collusion. Which there was. I'm guessing the fact you're now posting obvious lies about what I said shows that you know I'm right and you were wrong.
I never said anything about criminal collusion at all.
Are you really trying to knock down a strawman based on YOUR false statements?
Do you even know what conversation we are having?
Why are you posting obvious lies about my position? My entire position has simply been that the Trump campaign colluded with Russia. Which they did. If you were ignorant of the fact that collusion was not only criminal in nature, then that's a you problem. But it doesn't change the fact I've been right the entire time and I've exposed you as either being incredibly ignorant to the definition of the word "collusion" or outright posting lies about the actions of the Trump campaign.
So, which is it? Were you ignorant or were you posting lies?
You should pay more attention to the news then.Excuse me, I have not heard a Republican in Congress state they were going to impeach anyone.
As I asked you before...However, I do see it possible for members of Biden's administration where hearings will be held that could result in them being impeached.
Only if someone is a liar.Your 151 post makes clear that you have always been speaking of criminal collusion
None of this is even remotely close to truth and your desperate attempt to post as many lies as possible is the actual deflection here. So, let's bring it back to what really matters., because you stated therein that by Trump’s action for an investigation, he was trying to protect Russia from the accusation that Putin hacked the DNC. You did not go as far as Mad Lib Dems, who claimed that Trump had also colluded with Russia to attempt hacking the American voting process and to circulate anti Hilary political ads— at least you did not do so on this thread. But you have never spoken of collusion in any benign sense, which means that you were ignorant of the distinction. You’re trying to deflect by hijacking the meaning of words for your partisan purposes, just as you did with your fatuous untruths about the word “testify.”
That's true because I haven't blatantly lied about anything you've said. You, on the other hand, have posted numerous lies about my words (to the point where you're literally arguing with me over what I meant) and are now trying to deflect from the fact that you have admitted the truth, which is that there was collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia.So I don’t have to ask if you are a liar or just ignorant
Not correct. You are not understanding impeachment. Impeachment is a political process; not a criminal process, but no one ever said impeachment was a political move, like a fillibuster or gerrymandering. It remains a serious matter, to be used as last resort. There is still the standard of "high crimes and misdemeanors", but "high crimes and misdemeanors" are defined by congress, not necessarily criminal code. For example, a high crime for a POTUS is abuse of power. Abuse of Power is not defined in the criminal code, but it is one of the most serious crimes a POTUS can commit.I mean, we were assured by the Democrat faithful throughout the Trump administration that impeachment was political and didn't need to be connected to a criminal act, which they used to justify the lopsided rules they formulated for Trump impeachments... so basically, by Democrats own arguments, yes, he should be impeached, and no the Democrats should be denied witnesses, and left out of key meetings and hearings.
I think you're being generous here.Not correct. You are not understanding impeachment.
Well said.Impeachment is a political process; not a criminal process, but no one ever said impeachment was a political move, like a fillibuster or gerrymandering. It remains a serious matter, to be used as last resort. There is still the standard of "high crimes and misdemeanors", but "high crimes and misdemeanors" are defined by congress, not necessarily criminal code. For example, a high crime for a POTUS is abuse of power. Abuse of Power is not defined in the criminal code, but it is one of the most serious crimes a POTUS can commit. Trump was impeached for two acts of abuse of power .... using the powers of the office for personal gain. Each were righteous impeachments.
If Biden should commit an egregious act of abuse of power, he should be impeached. Impeaching him for the sake of impeaching him, however, would be an abuse of power by Congress. This is not a game.
Not correct. You are not understanding impeachment. Impeachment is a political process; not a criminal process, but no one ever said impeachment was a political move, like a fillibuster or gerrymandering. It remains a serious matter, to be used as last resort. There is still the standard of "high crimes and misdemeanors", but "high crimes and misdemeanors" are defined by congress, not necessarily criminal code. For example, a high crime for a POTUS is abuse of power. Abuse of Power is not defined in the criminal code, but it is one of the most serious crimes a POTUS can commit.
The Common Misconception About ‘High Crimes and Misdemeanors’
The constitutional standard for impeachment is different from what’s at play in a regular criminal trial.www.theatlantic.com
Trump was impeached for two acts of abuse of power .... using the powers of the office for personal gain. Each were righteous impeachments.
If Biden should commit an egregious act of abuse of power, he should be impeached. Impeaching him for the sake of impeaching him, however, would be an abuse of power by Congress. This is not a game.
"high crimes and misdemeanors" are defined by congress, not necessarily criminal code.
Only if someone is a liar.
Here's a link to post 151. Show me where I even so much as insinuated the word "criminal": https://debatepolitics.com/threads/...y-impeach-biden.483517/page-7#post-1076085649
None of this is even remotely close to truth and your desperate attempt to post as many lies as possible is the actual deflection here. So, let's bring it back to what really matters.
You now admit that the Trump campaign colluded with Russia, correct? Whether it was criminal or non-criminal, you agree there was collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia, yes?
That's true because I haven't blatantly lied about anything you've said. You, on the other hand, have posted numerous lies about my words (to the point where you're literally arguing with me over what I meant) and are now trying to deflect from the fact that you have admitted the truth, which is that there was collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia.
So, admit it. Craft an honest post which says, "I, Ouroboros, do solemnly acknowledge there was collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia." You don't even have to type it out, feel free to copy and paste. But just admit the truth and quit posting lies about what I've said to deflect from it.
'No question' a Republican House will impeach Joe Biden: CNN legal analyst
During a Monday morning appearance on CNN's "New Day," legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin told host Brianna Keilar that he has no doubt in his mind that a Republican-majority House of Representatives will attempt to impeach President Joe Biden if they take control after the midterm election.As part of...www.rawstory.com
Many on the Right see Trump's impeachment as unfair persecution of an innocent man.
Given that they take back the House, should they impeach Biden for retribution?
Biden deserves impeachment but before they impeach him they must impeach Harris first. They then should make sure'No question' a Republican House will impeach Joe Biden: CNN legal analyst
During a Monday morning appearance on CNN's "New Day," legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin told host Brianna Keilar that he has no doubt in his mind that a Republican-majority House of Representatives will attempt to impeach President Joe Biden if they take control after the midterm election.As part of...www.rawstory.com
Many on the Right see Trump's impeachment as unfair persecution of an innocent man.
Given that they take back the House, should they impeach Biden for retribution?
That was a good start, but you went off the rails quickly. So let's try it again:I, Ouroboros,
I did a quick check to see exactly what you said about Trump's criminal collusion with Russia. I'll note in passing that I was the first one to use the word "collusion" in this exchange, since I was the only one of us interested in the background behind the Zelensky call.That was a good start, but you went off the rails quickly. So let's try it again:
So, admit it. Craft an honest post which says, "I, Ouroboros, do solemnly acknowledge there was collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia." You don't even have to type it out, feel free to copy and paste. But just admit the truth and quit posting lies about what I've said to deflect from it.
Or you can admit you've been blatantly posting lies this entire time. Whichever suits you better, I suppose.
Trump is 100% seeking to defend Russia. Whether it was because it would personally benefit him or because he feels some allegiance to Russia for some reason is irrelevant.
All these postings of lies, deflections, and red herrings and you still can't admit the truth. So let's try it again:I did a quick check to see exactly what you said about Trump's criminal collusion with Russia. I'll note in passing that I was the first one to use the word "collusion" in this exchange, since I was the only one of us interested in the background behind the Zelensky call.
But when you got into the subject, you revealed a slavish allegiance to all of the corrupt DNC's talking points. From post #206:
Neither of these motivations can be deemed "benign collusion," which I'm sure you knew nothing about until I posted a legal definition. So in the sense that you mean "collusion"-- the same sense used by the liberal MSM-- Trump did not commit collusion.
He did, as I have said before, seek to get dirt on the corrupt DNC. But in your complete and total dishonesty, you failed to respond to my earlier point-- that Trump looked for dirt, and when he didn't find it, he didn't claim that he did have dirt, beyond continuing to rail against "the swamp" in a general sense. In contrast, the DNC knowingly paid for a dossier full of unverified information and blatantly lied to the American public about the dossier's truth-value.
But yes, go ahead and continue to prate about the Zelensky quid pro quo, for which you have no evidence, and to ignore the DNC's corruption, for which the evidence is beyond question. I don't think you've said Word One about the Dossier here-- so now that I've answered your question, let's see you respond with at least a tiny bit of honesty.
I am indeed happy to admit that you have been posting lies all this time, with the slight excuse that, having been infected with TDS, you literally cannot tell truth for falsehood.All these postings of lies, deflections, and red herrings and you still can't admit the truth. So let's try it again:
So, admit it. Craft an honest post which says, "I, Ouroboros, do solemnly acknowledge there was collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia." You don't even have to type it out, feel free to copy and paste. But just admit the truth and quit posting lies about what I've said to deflect from it.
Or you can admit you've been blatantly posting lies this entire time. Whichever suits you better, I suppose.
Then do it. Admit the Trump campaign colluded with Russia in the 2016 election. You've given every partisan hack excuse in the world to avoid directly admitting it, even as you have specifically acknowledged actions of collusion.I am indeed happy to admit
Then do it. Admit the Trump campaign colluded with Russia in the 2016 election. You've given every partisan hack excuse in the world to avoid directly admitting it, even as you have specifically acknowledged actions of collusion.
So, again, will you admit the Trump campaign colluded with Russia? Or are you going to keep posting lies about it?
No, you haven't. Well, you actually have admitted the Trump campaign colluded with Russia when you acknowledged Trump Jr., Manafort, and Kushner secretly met with Russian government officials, but I want to see you say the words "The Trump campaign colluded with Russia in the 2016 election".I admitted
Not for retribution. How petty and stupid does a group have to be? If there's an impeachable offense, go for it. Otherwise get your attention on the country where it belongs.'No question' a Republican House will impeach Joe Biden: CNN legal analyst
During a Monday morning appearance on CNN's "New Day," legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin told host Brianna Keilar that he has no doubt in his mind that a Republican-majority House of Representatives will attempt to impeach President Joe Biden if they take control after the midterm election.As part of...www.rawstory.com
Many on the Right see Trump's impeachment as unfair persecution of an innocent man.
Given that they take back the House, should they impeach Biden for retribution?
No, you haven't. Well, you actually have admitted the Trump campaign colluded with Russia when you acknowledged Trump Jr., Manafort, and Kushner secretly met with Russian government officials, but I want to see you say the words "The Trump campaign colluded with Russia in the 2016 election".
It's okay, you can do it. We all know it is true.
The nation's lifespan may not be that long.It may take them another 30-40 years to admit it.
No, you haven't. Well, you actually have admitted the Trump campaign colluded with Russia when you acknowledged Trump Jr., Manafort, and Kushner secretly met with Russian government officials, but I want to see you say the words "The Trump campaign colluded with Russia in the 2016 election".
It's okay, you can do it. We all know it is true.
It may take them another 30-40 years to admit it.
No, it is pinning down those who would dishonestly say things. You repeatedly claimed collusion did not happen, then you acknowledged it did. So I want to see you explicitly state that the Trump campaign colluded with Russia in the 2016 election. All you have to do is say what we all already know to be true.Repeating posts obsessively is the hallmark of the loser.
Well this is a lie:Nobody’s denied meetings.
Donald Trump was not President in 2016.Meetings are part of Presidential affairs
I'm sure English is not your first language, but the thing you just said here actually hurts your position.But only an idiot would automatically label meetings as legal collusion.
No, it is pinning down those who would dishonestly say things. You repeatedly claimed collusion did not happen, then you acknowledged it did. So I want to see you explicitly state that the Trump campaign colluded with Russia in the 2016 election. All you have to do is say what we all already know to be true.
So I guess the real question is why will you not admit what we all know to be true? Why is sticking to the lie everyone knows is a lie more important to you than the truth? You can post honestly or you can post dishonestly. To post honestly, all you have to do is say what we all know to be true, which is that the Trump campaign colluded with Russia. You know it. I know it. Everyone knows it. But you're still posting dishonestly in claiming it didn't happen, even as you acknowledge acts of collusion.
So why won't you admit the truth?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?