- Joined
- Dec 28, 2018
- Messages
- 343
- Reaction score
- 261
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
What facts do you think I don't like?
So the business deal in and of itself was not illegal.
Yes I do care, I believe B Clinton should have been removed for his perjury and subornation of perjury.
Lying is lyinig it doesn't matter what the lie is.
The fact is they didn't remove clinton from office on perjury they won't do it on trump.
if this is even the case. you are making an assumption of facts not found in evidence.
True. But the question is, do they care? Does the GOP really care as long as it means placing their party over country? Does their base really care?
Wasn't the "But Bill lied too!" defense predictable to everyone?
They're drowning.
Specifically the facts outlined for the Federal Judge in order for sentencing of Cohen for his role in this conspiracy with Trump and Pecker.
Suborn appears nowhere in the articles of impeachment that I can find. Will you please link us to it?
And for the record, I supported the impeachment of Clinton on the basis of obstruction of justice. As for the black mark on the Democratic Party, meh. While technically correct, the underlying issues are vastly different. Hardly are these apples-to-apples comparisons.
Do you believe the same about Trump?
That's your strategy to excuse Trump's crimes by making false equivalences to other crimes.
All lies are not equal. A girl lying about her age is not the same as a girl lying about you being the father of her baby. Stealing candy is not the same as stealing a car.
Every rational person understands these distinctions.
Bill Clinton was saved because he lied about an affair. People felt it was understandable and that it his sex life was none of our business. It's not the same with Trump. He instructed Cohen to lie to Congress to obstruct an investigation into his dealings with Russia.
Congress is investigating an issue and the president is conspiring with people to lie to Congress. That's very serious.
The testimony of a convicted liar (seeking a better sentencing deal?) is not vey strong evidence. If corroborated by other sources and documents then it is much better evidence, yet if the actions being covered up are not in and of themselves criminal (e.g. negotiating a business deal before being elected POTUS) then I don't see conviction (of an impeachable offense) as likely.
You're welcome. And me, too. I still find and look-up new words & ideas on a regular basis. Something I've done since my early childhood.I love learning new things. Thanks for that Voltaire quote.
The base doesn't care, as they only care about pissing off liberals in any way possible.
But the GOP establishment? If they feel Trump becomes enough of a detriment to their political party and agenda, they WILL throw him to the wolves. The tax cuts and supreme court justices have been enough to cover for him now...but there's only so much cover they'll provide for him if they feel he becomes a threat to their party's political power.
And what facts are those?
I'd like to agree. But as more and more come out, and we see the establishment GOP dig their heels in even further in their complicity, it has me questioning if they won't allow themselves to go down with the sinking ship.
The damn that is the support in the Senate and Congress for Trump is beginning to crack.
It is clear now that Trump's days are numbered, and that number is far shorter than two years
Good gravy man....are you serious? Go back to the first post in this exchange between us regarding Trump being an unindicted co-conspirator in the criminal conspiracy with Cohen and Pecker.
Oh did I forget to mention, apdst's dumb game, making you answer questions and then pretending you didn't ask and asking again, MyCroft taught apbdst what little he knows! This is the PINNACLE of their debate skills! Real cream of the crop stuff for MyCroft!
It's the same strategy everywhere. Feign ignorance. Pepper questions that they already know the answers to. When they aren't acting world-wise, they assume the role of naive, innocent children.
I don’t agree. If it’s that bad, they will have no choice. Even republicans abandoned Nixon at the end. If there is clear and obvious evidence that trump committed a crime, no way in hell can the senate ignore that.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
It gets old, like AGES ago, like from maybe the third post ya read of theirs (from just the last hour's frantic Trump fellating usually)
I kinda doubt we're gonna see an impeachment if its as bad as it looks.
Its one thing to I.peach someone for something they did while in office.
Its another one entirely to impeach someone for things they did to get into office.
IF trump colluded then the legitimacy of his presidency, and therefore its fruits, comes into question.
I don't think we've had that situation before. At the presidential level anyway.
I don't think either side really wants to open that can of worms.
I could be wrong, but does a president who is caught cheating his way into office have any authority? Are his signatures on laws and EOs valid?
I don't even think those questions have been asked.
And that asking them would open a can of worms neither politicians nor the donors they serve want opened.
We'll see, I guess.
Nothing was more to be desired than that every practicable obstacle should be opposed to cabal, intrigue, and corruption. These most deadly adversaries of republican government might naturally have been expected to make their approaches from more than one querter, but chiefly from the desire in foreign powers to gain an improper ascendant in our councils. How could they better gratify this, than by raising a creature of their own to the chief magistracy of the Union? But the convention have guarded against all danger of this sort, with the most provident and judicious attention.
Good gravy man....are you serious? Go back to the first post in this exchange between us regarding Trump being an unindicted co-conspirator in the criminal conspiracy with Cohen and Pecker.
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?