Offical Impeachment Thread

[progressive hunter]

From what I've been watching, it's all based on hearsay.
I suppose it might work in a Kangaroo Court, but, not in real America.

Real Americans can believe their ambassadors and other government officials who are reasoned, educated and intelligent people who have spent their lives being measured and cautious in their views.
I see no problem whatsoever in answering the questions and explaining what they saw and heard.

They had to rely on second hand information, which they already admitted to, old lady.
Kinda like garbage in, garbage out.

You cannot refute it, and Taylor and Kent couldn't either.

?They were there. What kind of information would satisfy you?

where is "THERE"???

cause they werent there for the phonecall

"The Phone Call" was the tip of the iceberg. Now we can see what was previously under water, too. The call was the tip of the iceberg.

and neither of them were there for it,,,

 

[jc456]

Been watching

Does not seem to be going well for Team Trump

From what I've been watching, it's all based on hearsay.
I suppose it might work in a Kangaroo Court, but, not in real America.

Real Americans can believe their ambassadors and other government officials who are reasoned, educated and intelligent people who have spent their lives being measured and cautious in their views.
I see no problem whatsoever in answering the questions and explaining what they saw and heard.

but they didnt see or hear anything,,,

Oh, I disagree. Trump did exactly what has been alleged. Whether it is worthy of Trump losing his job is another story. But what happened is perfectly clear.

he did? you know it? show us your evidence.

sweetie you're all talk blah, blah, blah, does your face eventually fall off? yes indeed.

I'm waiting.

 

[yidnar]

From what I've been watching, it's all based on hearsay.
I suppose it might work in a Kangaroo Court, but, not in real America.

Real Americans can believe their ambassadors and other government officials who are reasoned, educated and intelligent people who have spent their lives being measured and cautious in their views.
I see no problem whatsoever in answering the questions and explaining what they saw and heard.

They had to rely on second hand information, which they already admitted to, old lady.
Kinda like garbage in, garbage out.

You cannot refute it, and Taylor and Kent couldn't either.

?They were there. What kind of information would satisfy you?

where is "THERE"???

cause they werent there for the phonecall

"The Phone Call" was the tip of the iceberg. Now we can see what was previously under water, too. The call was the tip of the iceberg.

so now dems can read minds .......great ....

 

[IM2]

Been watching

Does not seem to be going well for Team Trump

From what I've been watching, it's all based on hearsay.
I suppose it might work in a Kangaroo Court, but, not in real America.

Real Americans can believe their ambassadors and other government officials who are reasoned, educated and intelligent people who have spent their lives being measured and cautious in their views.
I see no problem whatsoever in answering the questions and explaining what they saw and heard.

but they didnt see or hear anything,,,

Oh, I disagree. Trump did exactly what has been alleged. Whether it is worthy of Trump losing his job is another story. But what happened is perfectly clear.

Can you state what has been alleged?
The witnesses could not

The witnesses don't have to. They are there to testify to what they have been part of.

 

[Rambunctious]

 

[007]

"Do this little thing for me and............."

Where did he say 'and'???? He asked for a favor. Period. NO "and". Quit fucking lying like a schiff.

He is not entitled to ask for a personal favour. The US is not a fucking banana republic.

Oh really? Please show the AMERICAN LAW that specifically states the president can't ask a favor of a foreign government.

Here's a clue... IT'S DONE ALL THE TIME, BY EVERY LEADER, OF EVERY GOVERNMENT... ALL THE TIME.

For Christ sake, GET A CLUE.

Not for personal gain. That is pretty standard.

What "personal gain" was that?

 

[Meister]

Been watching

Does not seem to be going well for Team Trump

From what I've been watching, it's all based on hearsay.
I suppose it might work in a Kangaroo Court, but, not in real America.

Real Americans can believe their ambassadors and other government officials who are reasoned, educated and intelligent people who have spent their lives being measured and cautious in their views.
I see no problem whatsoever in answering the questions and explaining what they saw and heard.

They had to rely on second hand information, which they already admitted to, old lady.
Kinda like garbage in, garbage out.

You cannot refute it, and Taylor and Kent couldn't either.

?They were there. What kind of information would satisfy you?

He's an always Trumper. Facts don't matter to him.

You are a hack, IM2 pure and simple.
The facts could bitch slap you in the face and you would never admit to it. Run along

 

[teddyearp]

I think George Kent is making a better case for Trump than he is impeachment.

 

[IM2]

Been watching

Does not seem to be going well for Team Trump

From what I've been watching, it's all based on hearsay.
I suppose it might work in a Kangaroo Court, but, not in real America.

Real Americans can believe their ambassadors and other government officials who are reasoned, educated and intelligent people who have spent their lives being measured and cautious in their views.
I see no problem whatsoever in answering the questions and explaining what they saw and heard.

but they didnt see or hear anything,,,

Oh, I disagree. Trump did exactly what has been alleged. Whether it is worthy of Trump losing his job is another story. But what happened is perfectly clear.

he did? you know it? show us your evidence.

sweetie you're all talk blah, blah, blah, does your face eventually fall off? yes indeed.

I'm waiting.

And may you keep waiting.

 

[yidnar]

Starting this morning AMERICA will begin to be shown evidence of more corruption done by this president. Now the standard apologists here will try to claim we aren't hearing what we heard. A live event will be turned into a claim of liberal media spin. It will be called a coup and a witch hunt. But the reality here is we are looking at a constitutional process for the ultimate check on a tyrannical president. Trump is the one that has overturned the result that did not elect the peoples choice for president by HIS BEHAVIOR.

The day has come for Trump. He and his supporters must learn that he cannot do anything he wants.

No one is above the law. Republicans don't get special rights.

Historic impeachment hearings are set to begin, with GOP and Democrats pushing dueling messages on Trump’s conduct

Today is the beginning of public impeachment hearings. Impeachment is just a formal and fancy word for indict or accuse.

The end of the process in the House started today will be to accuse trump of crimes.

Then it goes to the Senate for a trial. No matter what evidence is presented. No matter what the truth is, trump will not be convicted. The republicans won't vote guilty no matter what and anyone who believes they will is fooling themselves.

It's just sad that we have people who put themselves and their political party before our nation, our constitution and the rule of law.

That will be 100% correct, even if they find him guilty of raping 13 year olds and threatening to kill them if the tell on him.

Some of us just think that keeping our Constitutional Republic together is a higher calling than pandering to your fantasies.

the supposed extortee the president of the Ukraine disagrees with your lie .

 

[IM2]

From what I've been watching, it's all based on hearsay.
I suppose it might work in a Kangaroo Court, but, not in real America.

Real Americans can believe their ambassadors and other government officials who are reasoned, educated and intelligent people who have spent their lives being measured and cautious in their views.
I see no problem whatsoever in answering the questions and explaining what they saw and heard.

They had to rely on second hand information, which they already admitted to, old lady.
Kinda like garbage in, garbage out.

You cannot refute it, and Taylor and Kent couldn't either.

?They were there. What kind of information would satisfy you?

He's an always Trumper. Facts don't matter to him.

You are a hack, IM2 pure and simple.
The facts could bitch slap you in the face and you would never admit to it. Run along

You are the hack junior. The facts are clear.

 

[jc456]

From what I've been watching, it's all based on hearsay.
I suppose it might work in a Kangaroo Court, but, not in real America.

Real Americans can believe their ambassadors and other government officials who are reasoned, educated and intelligent people who have spent their lives being measured and cautious in their views.
I see no problem whatsoever in answering the questions and explaining what they saw and heard.

but they didnt see or hear anything,,,

Oh, I disagree. Trump did exactly what has been alleged. Whether it is worthy of Trump losing his job is another story. But what happened is perfectly clear.

he did? you know it? show us your evidence.

sweetie you're all talk blah, blah, blah, does your face eventually fall off? yes indeed.

I'm waiting.

And may you keep waiting.

there you go. spoken like a true drama queen

 

[theHawk]

Trump authorized funds to Ukraine in 2018 also. The situation with Biden occurred before Trump was elected. Trump has released funds to Ukraine until this year. He had 3 years to be concerned about the corruption and wasn't. Let's cut the crap, Trump tried extorting the president of Ukraine to get dirt on a political opponent.

Ukraine got a new President, moron. Which meant it was a good time to ask to reopen the previous corruption investigations shit down by the last.

Why is that so hard for you to understand?

 

[August West]

Been watching

Does not seem to be going well for Team Trump

From what I've been watching, it's all based on hearsay.
I suppose it might work in a Kangaroo Court, but, not in real America.

Real Americans can believe their ambassadors and other government officials who are reasoned, educated and intelligent people who have spent their lives being measured and cautious in their views.
I see no problem whatsoever in answering the questions and explaining what they saw and heard.

They had to rely on second hand information, which they already admitted to, old lady.
Kinda like garbage in, garbage out.

You cannot refute it, and Taylor and Kent couldn't either.

?They were there. What kind of information would satisfy you?

They were not there, they never were with the president, they never spoke to the president,
and they never were on the phone with the president.
Either stop your lying, or get your facts straight.
They had to rely on others to formulate their opinions.

Nobody saw Monica Lewinsky give Clinton a BJ either. Irrelevant.

 

[jc456]

Trump authorized funds to Ukraine in 2018 also. The situation with Biden occurred before Trump was elected. Trump has released funds to Ukraine until this year. He had 3 years to be concerned about the corruption and wasn't. Let's cut the crap, Trump tried extorting the president of Ukraine to get dirt on a political opponent.

Ukraine got a new President, moron. Which meant it was a good time to ask to reopen the previous corruption investigations shit down by the last.

Why is that so hard for you to understand?

I really can't believe you just made that statement. They can't understand anything.

 

[Polishprince]

Trump authorized funds to Ukraine in 2018 also. The situation with Biden occurred before Trump was elected. Trump has released funds to Ukraine until this year. He had 3 years to be concerned about the corruption and wasn't. Let's cut the crap, Trump tried extorting the president of Ukraine to get dirt on a political opponent.

Actually, President Trump was very concerned about Ukraine corruption for years and had already articulated that to them personally and through trusted intermediaries like Giuliani.

But what happened this summer was that he used the whistleblower to manipulate the Media into talking about Biden Family corruption.

And they fell for it.

President Zelensky admitted he wasn't pressured at all by President Trump.

I will take the man at his word.

 

[IM2]

Starting this morning AMERICA will begin to be shown evidence of more corruption done by this president. Now the standard apologists here will try to claim we aren't hearing what we heard. A live event will be turned into a claim of liberal media spin. It will be called a coup and a witch hunt. But the reality here is we are looking at a constitutional process for the ultimate check on a tyrannical president. Trump is the one that has overturned the result that did not elect the peoples choice for president by HIS BEHAVIOR.

The day has come for Trump. He and his supporters must learn that he cannot do anything he wants.

No one is above the law. Republicans don't get special rights.

Historic impeachment hearings are set to begin, with GOP and Democrats pushing dueling messages on Trump’s conduct

Today is the beginning of public impeachment hearings. Impeachment is just a formal and fancy word for indict or accuse.

The end of the process in the House started today will be to accuse trump of crimes.

Then it goes to the Senate for a trial. No matter what evidence is presented. No matter what the truth is, trump will not be convicted. The republicans won't vote guilty no matter what and anyone who believes they will is fooling themselves.

It's just sad that we have people who put themselves and their political party before our nation, our constitution and the rule of law.

That will be 100% correct, even if they find him guilty of raping 13 year olds and threatening to kill them if the tell on him.

Some of us just think that keeping our Constitutional Republic together is a higher calling than pandering to your fantasies.

Not if you support Trump.

 

[Billiejeens]

From what I've been watching, it's all based on hearsay.
I suppose it might work in a Kangaroo Court, but, not in real America.

Real Americans can believe their ambassadors and other government officials who are reasoned, educated and intelligent people who have spent their lives being measured and cautious in their views.
I see no problem whatsoever in answering the questions and explaining what they saw and heard.

but they didnt see or hear anything,,,

Oh, I disagree. Trump did exactly what has been alleged. Whether it is worthy of Trump losing his job is another story. But what happened is perfectly clear.

Can you state what has been alleged?
The witnesses could not

The witnesses don't have to. They are there to testify to what they have been part of.

They are part of a little coffee klatch that gossiped about political policy from the new President that they didn't expect, ( or like) because they believed that the fix was in for Hillary.

That is it
That is what they were a part of
Nothing more.

 

[Meister]

From what I've been watching, it's all based on hearsay.
I suppose it might work in a Kangaroo Court, but, not in real America.

Real Americans can believe their ambassadors and other government officials who are reasoned, educated and intelligent people who have spent their lives being measured and cautious in their views.
I see no problem whatsoever in answering the questions and explaining what they saw and heard.

They had to rely on second hand information, which they already admitted to, old lady.
Kinda like garbage in, garbage out.

You cannot refute it, and Taylor and Kent couldn't either.

?They were there. What kind of information would satisfy you?

They were not there, they never were with the president, they never spoke to the president,
and they never were on the phone with the president.
Either stop your lying, or get your facts straight.
They had to rely on others to formulate their opinions.

Nobody saw Monica Lewinsky give Clinton a BJ either. Irrelevant.

The DNA on the blue dress?

 

[teddyearp]

And now the lying Republican congressman is being corrected in his lies that hearsay is never admissible.

Again, please show us what court of law allows hearsay as evidence with proof. Otherwise STFU!