Offical Impeachment Thread

[depotoo]

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.

They did have dna...

 

[jc456]

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 blue dress was the equivalent of the transcript ...dumb ass !

shhhhh, that dudes face is going to fall off now.

 

[bripat9643]

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

It's never admissible in a court of law, moron. It is admissible in show trials and kangaroo courts.

 

[OldLady]

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.

You're usually fair. Don't call me a liar, please.

You are also relying on others to formulate your opinion, I take it. Does that mean your judgment has no merit?
I don't think I understand. This is not a criminal court and the rules of evidence is not the bar here, if that's what you're referring to.

 

[yidnar]

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.

I understand full well. Let me repost something from another poster:

Why do Republicans conclude the exact opposite output of investigations?

Republicans set up an investigation headed only by conservatives looking into election fraud by citizens and immigrants focused on democratic states. They find nothing and disbanded. Republicans still claim election fraud occurred.

Republicans set up an investigation headed by lifelong Republicans to evaluate Russian interference and any connection to Trump campaign. They indict and charge 34 people composed of six former Trump advisers, 26 Russian nationals, three Russian companies, one California man, and one London-based lawyer. Seven of these people (including five of the six former Trump advisers) have pleaded guilty. Republicans still claim no connection to Russia.

Democrats set up an investigation following republican established rules for prior impeachment inquiries which allows republicans to question witnesses equally where these witnesses apparently provide clear testimony of Trump offering up conditional aid to Ukraine based on opening investigations into the family of the top democratic contender. Republicans claim they aren’t allowed to even see what’s going on or ask questions.

Ten Benghazi investigations were set up including 6 controlled by a Republican held house. Despite numerous allegations against Obama administration officials of scandal, cover-up and lying regarding the Benghazi attack and its aftermath, none of the ten investigations found any evidence to support those allegations. Republicans still claim wrongdoings.

The right leaning FBI headed by a life long republican looks into the IRS for targeting political enemies. In January 2014, the lifelong Republican FBI director announced its investigation had found no evidence so far warranting the filing of federal criminal charges in connection with the controversy, as it had not found any evidence of "enemy hunting", and that the investigation continued. On October 23, 2015, the Justice Dept declared that no criminal charges would be filed. On September 8, 2017, the Trump Justice Department declined to reopen the criminal investigation. In late September 2017, an exhaustive report by the Treasury Dept Inspector General found that from 2004 to 2013, the IRS used both conservative and liberal keywords to choose targets for further scrutiny. Still the Republicans think the IRS was “weaponized”.

This has been a consistent pattern by republicans. Blame a democrat for anything and it's true just because you say so. No matter how much is shown that debunks, the republican bullshit just has to be true. Robert Mueller was a f-ing republican. A lifelong republican. So he was not out to help orchestrate a coup against Trump nor was anyone else on that team. The Mueller report found all kinds of problems and resulted in a large number of indictments. A person here stated that you are who you associate with. Multiple associates of Trump are in prison, served jail time, sang to stay free, or are waiting for court decisions. But I guess the prior comment doesn't apply to Trump. Everybody around his ass is a criminal but Trump is the only innocent man at Shawshank.

all of that !!! wow ... let me destroy your long meme with one sentence ........ leave it to idiot dems to call the investigation into a quid pro quo[ biden withholding money until prosecutor is fired] a quid pro quo .

 

[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.

I understand full well. Let me repost something from another poster:

Why do Republicans conclude the exact opposite output of investigations?

Republicans set up an investigation headed only by conservatives looking into election fraud by citizens and immigrants focused on democratic states. They find nothing and disbanded. Republicans still claim election fraud occurred.

Republicans set up an investigation headed by lifelong Republicans to evaluate Russian interference and any connection to Trump campaign. They indict and charge 34 people composed of six former Trump advisers, 26 Russian nationals, three Russian companies, one California man, and one London-based lawyer. Seven of these people (including five of the six former Trump advisers) have pleaded guilty. Republicans still claim no connection to Russia.

Democrats set up an investigation following republican established rules for prior impeachment inquiries which allows republicans to question witnesses equally where these witnesses apparently provide clear testimony of Trump offering up conditional aid to Ukraine based on opening investigations into the family of the top democratic contender. Republicans claim they aren’t allowed to even see what’s going on or ask questions.

Ten Benghazi investigations were set up including 6 controlled by a Republican held house. Despite numerous allegations against Obama administration officials of scandal, cover-up and lying regarding the Benghazi attack and its aftermath, none of the ten investigations found any evidence to support those allegations. Republicans still claim wrongdoings.

The right leaning FBI headed by a life long republican looks into the IRS for targeting political enemies. In January 2014, the lifelong Republican FBI director announced its investigation had found no evidence so far warranting the filing of federal criminal charges in connection with the controversy, as it had not found any evidence of "enemy hunting", and that the investigation continued. On October 23, 2015, the Justice Dept declared that no criminal charges would be filed. On September 8, 2017, the Trump Justice Department declined to reopen the criminal investigation. In late September 2017, an exhaustive report by the Treasury Dept Inspector General found that from 2004 to 2013, the IRS used both conservative and liberal keywords to choose targets for further scrutiny. Still the Republicans think the IRS was “weaponized”.

This has been a consistent pattern by republicans. Blame a democrat for anything and it's true just because you say so. No matter how much is shown that debunks, the republican bullshit just has to be true. Robert Mueller was a f-ing republican. A lifelong republican. So he was not out to help orchestrate a coup against Trump nor was anyone else on that team. The Mueller report found all kinds of problems and resulted in a large number of indictments. A person here stated that you are who you associate with. Multiple associates of Trump are in prison, served jail time, sang to stay free, or are waiting for court decisions. But I guess the prior comment doesn't apply to Trump. Everybody around his ass is a criminal but Trump is the only innocent man at Shawshank.

I rest my case.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Well...this was a disaster fro Adam Schiff and the Dems. An absolute disaster.

 

[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.

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.

You're usually fair. Don't call me a liar, please.

You are also relying on others to formulate your opinion, I take it. Does that mean your judgment has no merit?
I don't think I understand. This is not a criminal court and the rules of evidence is not the bar here, if that's what you're referring to.

well post some facts then

 

[LoneLaugher]

"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.

Derp. Derp. Not a personal favor. Derp. Derp.

 

[Meathead]

I don't think I understand. This is not a criminal court and the rules of evidence is not the bar here, if that's what you're referring to.

You get that you've lost again. Dingbats, snowflakes and prigs rarely prevail...thank God.

 

[IM2]

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.

Pathetic liar.....you couldn't even have been listening to Kent or Taylor, they revealed your lies.

I am listening to them right now and what they have revealed is that republicans are unable to question based on what Trump has done. They are trying to obfuscate and misdirect.

 

[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.

You're usually fair. Don't call me a liar, please.

You are also relying on others to formulate your opinion, I take it. Does that mean your judgment has no merit?
I don't think I understand. This is not a criminal court and the rules of evidence is not the bar here, if that's what you're referring to.

I said, "either it was one or the other, Old Lady.
My facts came from the testimony of Kent and Taylor when they were crossed examined and asked specific questions.
They were not there, they have never spoken to the president, and they were not on the phone with the president.

Their words, not mine.

 

[jc456]

 

[Nostra]

Now Dimwingers want these clowns to read Putin's mind.


WTF is this, some carnival side show?

 

[IM2]

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.

You're usually fair. Don't call me a liar, please.

You are also relying on others to formulate your opinion, I take it. Does that mean your judgment has no merit?
I don't think I understand. This is not a criminal court and the rules of evidence is not the bar here, if that's what you're referring to.

well post some facts then

She has. What you don't want to believe doesn't change the that.

 

[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.

Derp. Derp. Not a personal favor. Derp. Derp.

Did I say "PERSONAL" favor... TWIT? NO!

Reading comprehension is your friend.

 

[jc456]

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.

You're usually fair. Don't call me a liar, please.

You are also relying on others to formulate your opinion, I take it. Does that mean your judgment has no merit?
I don't think I understand. This is not a criminal court and the rules of evidence is not the bar here, if that's what you're referring to.

well post some facts then

She has. What you don't want to believe doesn't change the that.

name a fact she posted.

 

[Meister]

?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.

Pathetic liar.....you couldn't even have been listening to Kent or Taylor, they revealed your lies.

I am listening to them right now and what they have revealed is that republicans are unable to question based on what Trump has done. They are trying to obfuscate and misdirect.

I am not sure what your first sentence is saying, IM2. The next is your opinion...not surprising the way you have been posting

 

[IM2]

Now Dimwingers want these clowns to read Putin's mind.


WTF is this, some carnival side show?

Here we have a "true American" trying to defend Putin.

 

[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 .

I hope that you quoted the wrong person.

sorry about that ....