Is Anyone Here Watching Impeachment TV Right Now?

[ph3iron]

Be honest.

Do you think anyone else is?

CHICKEN!!

I have an extremely low boredom threshold.

And you are here, at the old fart zero college forum?
Amazing

 

[Rye Catcher]

Be honest.

Do you think anyone else is?

Sure, those who understand that we are watching history, and in doing so are able to fact check comments made by the Democratic Managers and lawyers defending the Defendant, thus not see the out takes and editorials in the MSM and far right and far left Internet sites to confirm our biases. We should not let someone else who may have an agenda tell us what to believe, and what to claim is fake or irrelevant).

Watching history?

I feel like I should be taking notes, to prepare for a pop quiz in History 101.

Funny. You've already changed the channel, you'd fail that pop quiz for not doing the work necessary.

My inference is you were not hearing anything which supported your opinions, and no one wants to have a cognitive dissonance to bother them.

I've heard all this baloney a dozen times. Are you going to be watching when the Dems are being cross examined?

Yep, every minute of the trial. Of course neither the D's or the R's are being allowed to subpoena witnesses or documents as the D's wanted, and lost in a vote of 53-47 half a dozen times by a majority vote, every single Republican Senator.

We the People watching know that a cover up is in effect, transparency has not only clouded by the members of the Republican Caucus, they have already violated their oath to impartiality.

 

[toobfreak]

Be honest.

Do you think anyone else is?

I was.

But after Nadler posted vids of 3-4 people giving their opinions on being for impeachment 20 years ago, compared to their opinions now, without showing vids of him, Schumer, Pelosi, etc, I figured it was time to change channels.

To be honest Will, I try to catch it when I can. But I can't afford to sit and watch TV all day. I've caught hours of it so far and it has all been bloviating. I'll be totally honest:

• Between the Impeachment and now, I've yet to hear the Dems present ONE THING that was an AHHA moment for me, where I thought Trump had been busted. Genuinely guilty of something he was clearly way wrong in doing and for which I had a crisis of confidence that I said to myself: "I can't really support this guy any more!"
• Every time I watch the Dems "evidence," it is either:

1. Pure political spin.
2. Lies and supposition that one CANNOT draw from the evidence. Such as that Trump wanted Ukraine to spearhead a Biden investigation to strengthen Trump's reelection! To KNOW that, you'd have to know the corruption wasn't ever there! Yet the corruption remains unexplored. Further, no "benefit" has been shown, nor that Trump ever even needed it! So it all comes down to wistful conclusions Schiff has leaped to without the evidence to support it.
3. When witnesses are presented, they amount to little more than democratic partisans giving their opinions.
4. They have even used TV video where Trump says to the press that there is corruption there and that even China ought to look into it! And the spin: Trump asked a foreign nation to interfere in our elections. No, Trump stated the fact that there is corruption there (still not unproven), and that some of it involves China, corruption is something we need to investigate, Trump has a duty to investigate it, and if China can investigate it on their end, that could be helpful.

The Democrats have made 30 world-shattering claims! Threat to the nation! Danger to national security! So far, all they have shown me is a lot of desperate spin of a situation that very likely could have involved legitimate knowledge of corruption needing investigated overseas that for the Democrats could be particularly inconvenient because it involved someone they hoped to put in the White House!

If Biden WAS involved in a massive corruption in Ukraine (and China) that involved the 2016 election and other things, shouldn't the American people know this before he is placed on a ballot?

 

[Oldstyle]

Be honest.

Do you think anyone else is?

I was.

But after Nadler posted vids of 3-4 people giving their opinions on being for impeachment 20 years ago, compared to their opinions now, without showing vids of him, Schumer, Pelosi, etc, I figured it was time to change channels.

That right there tells you volumes about how bad the Democrat's case is against Trump, Will! Why would Nadler go that route when he's got to know the Trump camp is simply going to replay his opinions on the Clinton impeachment? Not only is he going to look like a total flip flop artist...everyone in the country is going to get to marvel at what a fat little porker he was back then! I smell desperation in the air...

 

[ph3iron]

Can't imagine a greater waste of time.

Figures.
We know our old white fart Archie bunkers aren't.
As they say.
"If you are too dumb to get a real job, join the military. Great socialist benefits"
Enjoying your socialist VA SS Medicare?

We know our old white fart Archie bunkers aren't.

are you?

Absolutely.
Love my commie benefits

 

[Auld Phart]

Be honest.

Do you think anyone else is?

Sure, those who understand that we are watching history, and in doing so are able to fact check comments made by the Democratic Managers and lawyers defending the Defendant, thus not see the out takes and editorials in the MSM and far right and far left Internet sites to confirm our biases. We should not let someone else who may have an agenda tell us what to believe, and what to claim is fake or irrelevant).

Watching history?

I feel like I should be taking notes, to prepare for a pop quiz in History 101.

Funny. You've already changed the channel, you'd fail that pop quiz for not doing the work necessary.

My inference is you were not hearing anything which supported your opinions, and no one wants to have a cognitive dissonance to bother them.

I've heard all this baloney a dozen times. Are you going to be watching when the Dems are being cross examined?

Yep, every minute of the trial. Of course neither the D's or the R's are being allowed to subpoena witnesses or documents as the D's wanted, and lost in a vote of 53-47 half a dozen times by a majority vote, every single Republican Senator.

We the People watching know that a cover up is in effect, transparency has not only clouded partisanship, the members who took the oath of impartiality have already violated their oath.

Reminds me of the one sided votes in the Intelligence and Judicial Inquiries in the House.

Blocking Republicans.

Seems both sides are partisan.

 

[boedicca]

No. I'd rather drink bleach while stabbing myself with an ice pick than watch the hideous Dem hacks on display.

 

[ph3iron]

Be honest.

Do you think anyone else is?

I was.

But after Nadler posted vids of 3-4 people giving their opinions on being for impeachment 20 years ago, compared to their opinions now, without showing vids of him, Schumer, Pelosi, etc, I figured it was time to change channels.

To be honest Will, I try to catch it when I can. But I can't afford to sit and watch TV all day. I've caught hours of it so far and it has all been bloviating. I'll be totally honest:

• Between the Impeachment and now, I've yet to hear the Dems present ONE THING that was an AHHA moment for me, where I thought Trump had been busted. Genuinely guilty of something he was clearly way wrong in doing and for which I had a crisis of confidence that I said to myself: "I can't really support this guy any more!"
• Every time I watch the Dems "evidence," it is either:

1. Pure political spin.
2. Lies and supposition that one CANNOT draw from the evidence. Such as that Trump wanted Ukraine to spearhead a Biden investigation to strengthen Trump's reelection! To KNOW that, you'd have to know the corruption wasn't ever there! Yet the corruption remains unexplored. Further, no "benefit" has been shown, nor that Trump ever even needed it! So it all comes down to wistful conclusions Schiff has leaped to without the evidence to support it.
3. When witnesses are presented, they amount to little more than democratic partisans giving their opinions.
4. They have even used TV video where Trump says to the press that there is corruption there and that even China ought to look into it! And the spin: Trump asked a foreign nation to interfere in our elections. No, Trump stated the fact that there is corruption there (still not unproven), and that some of it involves China, corruption is something we need to investigate, Trump has a duty to investigate it, and if China can investigate it on their end, that could be helpful.

The Democrats have made 30 world-shattering claims! Threat to the nation! Danger to national security! So far, all they have shown me is a lot of desperate spin of a situation that very likely could have involved legitimate knowledge of corruption needing investigated overseas that for the Democrats could be particularly inconvenient because it involved someone they hoped to put in the White House!

If Biden WAS involved in a massive corruption in Ukraine (and China) that involved the 2016 election and other things, shouldn't the American people know this before e is placed on a ballot?

No, just getting a foreign power to influence his election/opponent is too hard to understand.
If he was?
Absolutely.
He wasn't and was investigated.
Biden fired the prosecuter fot not investigating ENOUGH.

 

[Rambunctious]

Hell NO!.....

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

Sure, those who understand that we are watching history, and in doing so are able to fact check comments made by the Democratic Managers and lawyers defending the Defendant, thus not see the out takes and editorials in the MSM and far right and far left Internet sites to confirm our biases. We should not let someone else who may have an agenda tell us what to believe, and what to claim is fake or irrelevant).

Watching history?

I feel like I should be taking notes, to prepare for a pop quiz in History 101.

Funny. You've already changed the channel, you'd fail that pop quiz for not doing the work necessary.

My inference is you were not hearing anything which supported your opinions, and no one wants to have a cognitive dissonance to bother them.

Or could it be we’ve already seen and heard this song and dance which is giving nothing more? Just more bloviating and twisting of the hearsay over and over.

U Mad, bro? That 'hearsay' tells me Prezzie (Im)Peach(ed) needs to be jettisoned from this country sooner rather than later, but that's just me. More, I say! Keep this circus going!!

I heard that you murdered someone. Now should I believe that hearsay just because when no one actually heard you admit it or saw you commit it?

Deflection. You define the evidence as hearsay. You aren't a judge. Thus, no one gives any credence to your opinion about it. Next.

 

[Harry Dresden]

Be honest.

Do you think anyone else is?

Sure, those who understand that we are watching history, and in doing so are able to fact check comments made by the Democratic Managers and lawyers defending the Defendant, thus not see the out takes and editorials in the MSM and far right and far left Internet sites to confirm our biases. We should not let someone else who may have an agenda tell us what to believe, and what to claim is fake or irrelevant).

how many cups of coffee wry?....

 

[Persistence Of Memory]

Be honest.

Do you think anyone else is?

Sure, those who understand that we are watching history, and in doing so are able to fact check comments made by the Democratic Managers and lawyers defending the Defendant, thus not see the out takes and editorials in the MSM and far right and far left Internet sites to confirm our biases. We should not let someone else who may have an agenda tell us what to believe, and what to claim is fake or irrelevant).

Watching history?

I feel like I should be taking notes, to prepare for a pop quiz in History 101.

Funny. You've already changed the channel, you'd fail that pop quiz for not doing the work necessary.

My inference is you were not hearing anything which supported your opinions, and no one wants to have a cognitive dissonance to bother them.

I've heard all this baloney a dozen times. Are you going to be watching when the Dems are being cross examined?

Yep, every minute of the trial. Of course neither the D's or the R's are being allowed to subpoena witnesses or documents as the D's wanted, and lost in a vote of 53-47 half a dozen times by a majority vote, every single Republican Senator.

We the People watching know that a cover up is in effect, transparency has not only clouded by the members of the Republican Caucus, they have already violated their oath to impartiality.

You have the nerve to talk about fairness.....BAWWWHAHA

 

[depotoo]

Watching history?

I feel like I should be taking notes, to prepare for a pop quiz in History 101.

Funny. You've already changed the channel, you'd fail that pop quiz for not doing the work necessary.

My inference is you were not hearing anything which supported your opinions, and no one wants to have a cognitive dissonance to bother them.

Or could it be we’ve already seen and heard this song and dance which is giving nothing more? Just more bloviating and twisting of the hearsay over and over.

U Mad, bro? That 'hearsay' tells me Prezzie (Im)Peach(ed) needs to be jettisoned from this country sooner rather than later, but that's just me. More, I say! Keep this circus going!!

I heard that you murdered someone. Now should I believe that hearsay just because when no one actually heard you admit it or saw you commit it?

It's not hearsay.
Haven't you watched mafia movies?
Listen to the ambassadors for gods sake.
Is the con paying for his venue rallies yet?
Or stiffing like he stiffed his contractors??

It is hearsay. Period. Just because they don’t like him doesn’t mean
By the way, most candidates don’t get charged or if they do, a third the rate of Trump, in one 26 times the rate, so go suck that. And it is not required to pay for local security. And that is not hearsay. .
Fact-checking the cost for Trump rally in Minneapolis
Fact-checking the cost for Trump rally in Minneapolis
they charged Obama $20 grand.
https://apnews.com/cf2784dcebcea5fcb52654ece55c9f3f
this one wanted to charge Trump yet has not charged other candidates.
And remember, they don’t have to pay for security to begin with.

 

[depotoo]

Watching history?

I feel like I should be taking notes, to prepare for a pop quiz in History 101.

Funny. You've already changed the channel, you'd fail that pop quiz for not doing the work necessary.

My inference is you were not hearing anything which supported your opinions, and no one wants to have a cognitive dissonance to bother them.

Or could it be we’ve already seen and heard this song and dance which is giving nothing more? Just more bloviating and twisting of the hearsay over and over.

U Mad, bro? That 'hearsay' tells me Prezzie (Im)Peach(ed) needs to be jettisoned from this country sooner rather than later, but that's just me. More, I say! Keep this circus going!!

I heard that you murdered someone. Now should I believe that hearsay just because when no one actually heard you admit it or saw you commit it?

Deflection. You define the evidence as hearsay. You aren't a judge. Thus, no one gives any credence to your opinion about it. Next.

No deflection. Hearsay. No one stated they directly heard him say such. And it was actually stated by someone that did talk to him, he said no quid pro quo.
Now back to hearsay you murdered someone. Should I believe it?

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Be honest.

Do you think anyone else is?

CHICKEN!!

I have an extremely low boredom threshold.

And you are here, at the old fart zero college forum?
Amazing

Comedy with coffee is never boring.

 

[Rye Catcher]

Be honest.

Do you think anyone else is?

Sure, those who understand that we are watching history, and in doing so are able to fact check comments made by the Democratic Managers and lawyers defending the Defendant, thus not see the out takes and editorials in the MSM and far right and far left Internet sites to confirm our biases. We should not let someone else who may have an agenda tell us what to believe, and what to claim is fake or irrelevant).

how many cups of coffee wry?....

Three, all decaffeinated.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Be honest.

Do you think anyone else is?

Sure, those who understand that we are watching history, and in doing so are able to fact check comments made by the Democratic Managers and lawyers defending the Defendant, thus not see the out takes and editorials in the MSM and far right and far left Internet sites to confirm our biases. We should not let someone else who may have an agenda tell us what to believe, and what to claim is fake or irrelevant).

Watching history?

I feel like I should be taking notes, to prepare for a pop quiz in History 101.

Funny. You've already changed the channel, you'd fail that pop quiz for not doing the work necessary.

My inference is you were not hearing anything which supported your opinions, and no one wants to have a cognitive dissonance to bother them.

I've heard all this baloney a dozen times. Are you going to be watching when the Dems are being cross examined?

Yep, every minute of the trial. Of course neither the D's or the R's are being allowed to subpoena witnesses or documents as the D's wanted, and lost in a vote of 53-47 half a dozen times by a majority vote, every single Republican Senator.

We the People watching know that a cover up is in effect, transparency has not only clouded by the members of the Republican Caucus, they have already violated their oath to impartiality.

 

[Auld Phart]

Be honest.

Do you think anyone else is?

CHICKEN!!

I have an extremely low boredom threshold.

And you are here, at the old fart zero college forum?
Amazing

Comedy with coffee is never boring.

Comedy with coffee is never boring.

Coffee is nothing to laugh at...

(unless it's from Starbucks)

 

[Rye Catcher]

Watching history?

I feel like I should be taking notes, to prepare for a pop quiz in History 101.

Funny. You've already changed the channel, you'd fail that pop quiz for not doing the work necessary.

My inference is you were not hearing anything which supported your opinions, and no one wants to have a cognitive dissonance to bother them.

I've heard all this baloney a dozen times. Are you going to be watching when the Dems are being cross examined?

Yep, every minute of the trial. Of course neither the D's or the R's are being allowed to subpoena witnesses or documents as the D's wanted, and lost in a vote of 53-47 half a dozen times by a majority vote, every single Republican Senator.

We the People watching know that a cover up is in effect, transparency has not only clouded by the members of the Republican Caucus, they have already violated their oath to impartiality.[/QUOTE

Why not explain to the reader, what is funny about transparency and one's oath of office?

Is this funny?: We the People watching know that a cover up is in effect, transparency has not only clouded by the members of the Republican Caucus, they have already violated their oath to impartiality.[/QUOTE

Why not explain to the reader, what is funny about transparency and one's oath of office?

Is this funny?:

"We the People watching know that a cover up is in effect, transparency has not only clouded by the members of the Republican Caucus, they have already violated their oath to impartiality.[/QUOTE]

 

[justoffal]

Be honest.

Do you think anyone else is?

Let me see.... list of things to do today.

1.) Make a few posts
2.) Change rear brake caliper
3.) Brush out the dog's fur
4.) Take a long, ungodly noisy shit
5.) Head to the market for supper with Maga hat
6.) Take another long, ungodly noisey shit...

Nope .... didn't make the list.

Jo

Maybe look up MAGA??
Zero college I assume?
Our WWII Nazi group name?
I thought you would be at your KKK meeting

YAWWWWWWWWWWWN.....

Landslide 2020

Jo