Offical Impeachment Thread

[JoeMoma]

I am asking for information from folks who have more experience with this forum. Does anybody know if lefties are the ones responsible for taking the dozens of impeachment threads and dumping them all into a great big thread merge dumpster? I am all caught up with what the news of the day now, but I had to go to another forum to see all the different threads about the shiff show. Are the staff of usmb trying to hide how bad lefties looked at the shiff show today by censoring the DOZENS of shiff show threads that should exist here into this huge thread merge dumpster? Any info from the folks who are more familiar with this would be appreciated. This is the only board I have found that doesn't have the MANY threads required to properly encompass the shiff show.

That's just the style of the moderation on this board. The mods don't like many threads about one broad topic, even if the individual threads have a different angle on the broad topic.

 

[IM2]

You gutless Dem clowns do something about it DO IT impeach Trump.

/—-/ From Fox. GOP plans counter attack:
Reports have emerged that, should Trump be impeached by a majority vote in the House, Senate Republicans might strategically hold a lengthy trial to "scramble" the 2020 Democratic presidential primary -- including by requiring several of the contenders to remain in Washington to handle the trial. Trump is all but certain to be acquitted by the GOP-controlled Senate in the event of impeachment, given that a two-thirds vote is required in the Senate to remove the president.

Let it happen. Let republicans take until November 1 to remind the other 70 percent of the American people who aren't "we'll do anything for Trump" suckers about how corrupt this president is.

 

[IM2]

I am asking for information from folks who have more experience with this forum. Does anybody know if lefties are the ones responsible for taking the dozens of impeachment threads and dumping them all into a great big thread merge dumpster? I am all caught up with what the news of the day now, but I had to go to another forum to see all the different threads about the shiff show. Are the staff of usmb trying to hide how bad lefties looked at the shiff show today by censoring the DOZENS of shiff show threads that should exist here into this huge thread merge dumpster? Any info from the folks who are more familiar with this would be appreciated. This is the only board I have found that doesn't have the MANY threads required to properly encompass the shiff show.

That's just the style of the moderation on this board. The mods don't like many threads about one broad topic, even if the individual threads have a different angle on the broad topic.

This is true.

 

[Olde Europe]

I understand your objection to Taylor's testimony, but not being on the phone call has nothing to do with whether it happened. We've got the transcript, we know what was said. As for their "belief" system not being voted for, I never heard Trump saying he didn't support Ukraine's fight against the Russian's aggression.

Just saying:

President Donald Trump told G7 leaders that Crimea is Russian because everyone who lives there speaks Russian, according to two diplomatic sources.​

 

[Hutch Starskey]

That's ok, all Sondland can testify to is a "thought crime" since no crime was committed, let alone an impeachable crime.
Ukraine got the money and didn't investigate the Bidens, QED, no crime, period, full stop.

sondalnd admitted that there was a shake down.

A shakedown with no quid, no pro, and no quo?

How does that work?

It wouldn't matter if there was. As Professor Dershowitz pointed out, there is no law against quid pro quo's in the statute. He looked up, down and sideways. Couldn't find one.

So extortion is legal. Who knew?

Well we know a frame job when we see it.

Well we know a frame job when we see it.

Yes. With testimony from Trump's own appointees.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Democrats have yet to prove intent. I ll wait patiently.

Trumps demands of Zelensky show intent

Link to his "demand".

Watch this dodge...............

Not only Trump, but the staff Trump told him to deal with

Read my Signature...

Are you really that stupid? Serious question.

"I would like you to do us a favor"

Is a DEMAND in your twisted, demented world?

Please............PLEASE tell us you aren't that stupid. Unless you come to your senses and admit that is in no way a "DEMAND' our only conclusion can be that you are a moron.

Your call...............

I would like you to do us a favor though

A direct response to a request to buy Javelin missiles. When talking about the favors, it was clear they were personal in nature.

Favor regarding 2016 or 2020? 2016 is OK but 2020 is not. Therein lies the intent. How do you prove it was for 2020? I ll wait patiently.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

I understand your objection to Taylor's testimony, but not being on the phone call has nothing to do with whether it happened. We've got the transcript, we know what was said. As for their "belief" system not being voted for, I never heard Trump saying he didn't support Ukraine's fight against the Russian's aggression.

Just saying:

President Donald Trump told G7 leaders that Crimea is Russian because everyone who lives there speaks Russian, according to two diplomatic sources.​

He is actually correct about the linguistics of Crimea.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

sondalnd admitted that there was a shake down.

A shakedown with no quid, no pro, and no quo?

How does that work?

It wouldn't matter if there was. As Professor Dershowitz pointed out, there is no law against quid pro quo's in the statute. He looked up, down and sideways. Couldn't find one.

So extortion is legal. Who knew?

Well we know a frame job when we see it.

Well we know a frame job when we see it.

Yes. With testimony from Trump's own appointees.

Who heard it 2nd and 3rd hand...

 

[IM2]

No.
Sworn, first hand testimony, dope.

Pure opinion, dumbass.

Still sworn testimony, dope.

Opinions are not admissible in court unless it's from an expert witness.

Call it what you will, dope.
It's still sworn, first hand testimony. If this is the extent of your defense. You've already lost.

/——/ From Fox: ... impeachment inquiry against President Trump wrapped up with no major revelations -- but also highlighted weaknesses in Democrats' key witnesses, who relied primarily on second-hand information and never once interacted with the president.

From the Fake News network...

And this will be the repeated line until Lt. Col. Vindman shuts it up when he testifies. Maybe by then Trump will stop blocking witnesses.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

What makes you think you have the tank?

Simply because the military has a oath to protect our democracy

We are not a democracy, but a Republic, and you people are trying to destroy it.

You might at least learn what it is that you're trying to destroy.

We know what we are, that's why we oppose Trump.

Actually, you haven't a clue. You lack historical background. Otherwise you would not be what you are.

My historical background is far, far better than yours. That's why I oppose Trump.

How would you know? You have no background upon which to base that assessment.

 

[IM2]

No.
Sworn, first hand testimony, dope.

Pure opinion, dumbass.

Still sworn testimony, dope.

Opinions are not admissible in court unless it's from an expert witness.

Call it what you will, dope.
It's still sworn, first hand testimony. If this is the extent of your defense. You've already lost.

Hearsay is not first hand testimony.

The head Ambassador the Ukraines testimony is hardly based on hearsay. Apparently you don't mind if Trump stops blocking witnesses and documents if this is going to be your argument..

 

[rightwinger]

Today's media hack echo chamber blabbering point....

View attachment 289635

Mark Quigley (D): "Hearsay can be much better evidence than direct, and it's certainly valid in this instance."

So.....you're calling for the "first hand" witnesses like Bolton, Mulvaney, Pompeo, etc to testify then?

Republican strategy

Block access to those with direct involvement then proclaim......all you have is hearsay

Says the lackey for the shysters who've blocked access to the whistlegossip.

Exactly
Republicans pout that they can’t interview the whistleblower while they block access to Trump, Mulvaney, Giuliani, Pompeo

 

[IM2]

Simply because the military has a oath to protect our democracy

We are not a democracy, but a Republic, and you people are trying to destroy it.

You might at least learn what it is that you're trying to destroy.

We know what we are, that's why we oppose Trump.

Actually, you haven't a clue. You lack historical background. Otherwise you would not be what you are.

My historical background is far, far better than yours. That's why I oppose Trump.

How would you know? You have no background upon which to base that assessment.

I have plenty and it's called your postings.

 

[Ame®icano]

Today's media hack echo chamber blabbering point....

View attachment 289635

Mark Quigley (D): "Hearsay can be much better evidence than direct, and it's certainly valid in this instance."

So.....you're calling for the "first hand" witnesses like Bolton, Mulvaney, Pompeo, etc to testify then?

Sooo... You agree with Quigley's statement?

And, what what you said has to do with quote I posted?

 

[The Purge]

Democrats have yet to prove intent. I ll wait patiently.

Trumps demands of Zelensky show intent

Link to his "demand".

Watch this dodge...............

Not only Trump, but the staff Trump told him to deal with

Read my Signature...

Are you really that stupid? Serious question.

"I would like you to do us a favor"

Is a DEMAND in your twisted, demented world?

Please............PLEASE tell us you aren't that stupid. Unless you come to your senses and admit that is in no way a "DEMAND' our only conclusion can be that you are a moron.

Your call...............

I would like you to do us a favor though

A direct response to a request to buy Javelin missiles. When talking about the favors, it was clear they were personal in nature.

ASKED to DO A FAVOR INSTEAD OF DEMANDING UKRAINE TO DO SOMETHING...OR ELSE....SEEMS WRONGWINGER SPELLED OUT THE ANSWER AND DIDN'T EVEN KNOW IT!!!!

 

[Ame®icano]

Trump sent weapons. Obama sent blankets.

You are truly stupid if you believe that is somehow a viable defense.

Are you saying that blankets are more viable defense than weapons?

 

[IM2]

Today's media hack echo chamber blabbering point....

View attachment 289635

Mark Quigley (D): "Hearsay can be much better evidence than direct, and it's certainly valid in this instance."

So.....you're calling for the "first hand" witnesses like Bolton, Mulvaney, Pompeo, etc to testify then?

Sooo... You agree with Quigley's statement?

And, what what you said has to do with quote I posted?

No, don't run. Trump is blocking witnesses and information. So if you want first hand information, that means the first hand people must testify and turn over all documents.

 

[Ame®icano]

The DOJ prosecutes scum like Biden, moron, and Trump is their boss.

You have to be brain damaged not to understand such simple concepts.

The president isn't the DOJ.
Where's Barr in this equation, dope?

The President runs the DOJ, moron. He's the AG's boss. He's the boss of everyone in the DOJ.

The president cannot prosecute anyone, dope.

He can tell his AG to prosecute them, moron.

No. The evidence determines if there is to be a prosecution, dope. Not the president.

President provided all the evidence you needed... Transcript of the phone call.

 

[The Original Tree]

^ Extortion

Not even close. So how long do you republicans plan on being disingenuous?

Food for thought. It is what our foreign policy is based on and Trump was trying to weaponized it against his domestic opposition.

Yet Kent testified that Trumps policies on Ukraine are much better than maobamas was. Go figure. Kent also said he warned Bidens staff about Hunter.

.

Did he?

US-Russia Relations: Obama Signs Bill Giving Weapons To Ukraine, Allowing Economic Sanctions Against Russia

President Barack Obama signed the Ukraine Freedom Support Act on Thursday, but does not have immediate plans to enact the restrictions it authorizes. The law allows the U.S. to impose economic sanctions on Russia and give Ukraine up to $350 million in military aid as it resists pro-Russia rebels. The House of Representatives and Senate passed the bill earlier this week.

US-Russia Relations: Obama Signs Bill Giving Weapons To Ukraine, Allowing Economic Sanctions Against Russia

Yet maobama NEVER provided Ukraine with lethal aid, did he?

Also you seem to have jumped right over the 4 links I provided proving Ukraine intentionally interfered with the 2016 election. Why are you being such a coward? Can't admit you're wrong? Or does it just not fit your commie propaganda? Come on commie, man up.

.

He actually pulled some missiles out of THE UKRAINE, after he told PUTIN, "Wait until after the Election" WINK WINK, and then Putin took the Crimea.

 

[joaquinmiller]

It is disgusting that Trump committed a thoroughly corrupt act under the guise of hunting for corruption.

The man is sick in the head.

He could have been a hero for delivering missiles to Ukraine which Obama had refused to give them. Instead, he tried to use them for his own personal political gain, thus forever exposing his true motives which had nothing to do with saving Ukraine from Putin's attempts to reconstitute the Soviet Union.

We were never intended to hear a corruption cover story. If all had gone according to Trump/Giuliani wishes, one day Trump would have tweeted, 'Look, sleepy joe is under investigation by ukraine', as if it were all spontaneous.