White House says it will refuse to cooperate with impeachment inquiry

[Jingthing]

Oh please. Democrats have been screeching about obstruction of justice for years now. They still have NADA. Surely you can find some new accusation that hasn't been worn out, yes?
 
Now watch closely... it's all a scam. This *impeachment inquiry* will go nowhere. It'll fizzle out. The *whistleblower* scam is already being poked full of holes.

It's gone well beyond nowhere. 45 will be impeached. Even most 45 fans realize that by now.

Sent from my Lenovo A7020a48 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[bristolboy]

9 hours ago, Crazy Alex said:

Oh please. Democrats have been screeching about obstruction of justice for years now. They still have NADA. Surely you can find some new accusation that hasn't been worn out, yes?

 

Now watch closely... it's all a scam. This *impeachment inquiry* will go nowhere. It'll fizzle out. The *whistleblower* scam is already being poked full of holes.

The Mueller report disagrees with you.

[Crazy Alex]

9 hours ago, heybruce said:

NADA?  They have Trump's former lawyer and former campaign chairman in prison.  They may get his current lawyer in prison.  He may have trouble finding another campaign chairman.

 

Also, Trump keeps making the impeachment easier.  Trump has refused to respond to subpoena's regarding the impeachment inquiry.  Defying subpoenas was the third article of impeachment for Richard Nixon.     https://watergate.info/impeachment/articles-of-impeachment

 

The first article against Nixon also looks relevant to Trump.  Trump has also been fighting in court the release of tax returns and financial information, even though the law is very clear on the matter, and consistently losing.  He appeals after each loss, but will eventually run out of appeals.  Just because Trump has been successful in stalling justice doesn't mean he will succeed in permanently obstructing justice.

 

"The *whistleblower* scam is already being poked full of holes."?  No, but constantly thinking of reasons not to believe the whistle blower report is a popular diversion.  However since the contents of the report have been verified, it's hardly been "poked full of holes".

 

Pardon me for being suspicious, but a newby trying to stir things up by posting and re-posting discredited nonsense strikes me as very trollish.

 

You're right, I should have stipulated NADA on Trump. Remember how the Mueller report was supposed to take out Trump? Didn't happen. Then Jerry Nadler began his obsessive witch hunt. NADA. As far as Trump not cooperating with the current Democrat hysterics, I don't blame him. Enough is enough. Now, if you think you've got something with Trump not cooperating, make your move. It's your Democrats who've failed to do anything but posture, huff, puff and BLUFF.

 

I do find your last paragraph interesting. I am under the impression "World News" is about... well, World News. So of course topics will be commented on and revisited. I'm not sure how the allegations you make against me amount to "trollish". But do feel free to debunk anything I post, since you insinuate it is "discredited nonsense".

[Crazy Alex]

5 hours ago, bristolboy said:

The Mueller report disagrees with you.

No. You're wrong. If the Mueller report disagreed with me, Democrats would have already impeached. Obviously, the Mueller report gave no reason to impeach the president. So yes, logic trumps your unsubstantiated claim.

[Crazy Alex]

9 hours ago, Jingthing said:

It's gone well beyond nowhere. 45 will be impeached. Even most 45 fans realize that by now.

Sent from my Lenovo A7020a48 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app
 

I see nothing different now than I've been reading about for nearly three years. Longer, really. Trump can't win the nomination. Trump can't beat Hillary. Trump won't last a year. Mueller is gonna get Trump. Trump extorted Ukraine.

 

Now... what is the basis for your claim that most Trump supporters know he will be impeached?

[J Town]

2 minutes ago, Crazy Alex said:

No. You're wrong. If the Mueller report disagreed with me, Democrats would have already impeached. Obviously, the Mueller report gave no reason to impeach the president. So yes, logic trumps your unsubstantiated claim.

GAWD, I grow weary from Trump supporters' misrepresentation of facts. The Mueller report clearly pointed out obstruction and Mueller clearly stated he couldn't indict a sitting president. The instant Trump is no longer president, there is a mountain of criminal indictments that will crash on him and his family.

[Crazy Alex]

Just now, J Town said:

GAWD, I grow weary from Trump supporters' misrepresentation of facts. The Mueller report clearly pointed out obstruction and Mueller clearly stated he couldn't indict a sitting president. The instant Trump is no longer president, there is a mountain of criminal indictments that will crash on him and his family.

That's a fascinating response.  So what precludes the House from impeaching Trump? If Trump can be indicted after leaving office, then obviously he can be impeached prior to leaving office. In fact, impeachment is the remedy for a prosecutor not being able to indict a sitting president. Surely you understand this, yes? So what's been keeping the House from impeaching if what you allege is true?

 

But honestly, I can see why you're growing weary. Observing basic facts makes your argument crumble under its own weight as it did above.

 

So how about some more scrutiny of what you just posted? Yes, let's do that very thing. You stated Mueller couldn't indict a sitting president. I've already explained to you the folly in your thinking. You also claim that once Trump is out of office, indictments will crash around him AND "his family"? Well, why can't Mueller indict his family NOW? They're not the president, correct? In fact, indicting the family NOW would give law enforcement the opportunity to pressure them and get them to flip on the president, making impeachment all that easier. Yet, you'd like us to believe that Mueller (who by the way doesn't even know what the dossier or Fusion GPS are, but that's another conversation) is sitting on actionable offenses? Huh?????

[J Town]

1 minute ago, Crazy Alex said:

That's a fascinating response.  So what precludes the House from impeaching Trump? If Trump can be indicted after leaving office, then obviously he can be impeached prior to leaving office. In fact, impeachment is the remedy for a prosecutor not being able to indict a sitting president. Surely you understand this, yes? So what's been keeping the House from impeaching if what you allege is true?

 

But honestly, I can see why you're growing weary. Observing basic facts makes your argument crumble under its own weight as it did above.

 

So how about some more scrutiny of what you just posted? Yes, let's do that very thing. You stated Mueller couldn't indict a sitting president. I've already explained to you the folly in your thinking. You also claim that once Trump is out of office, indictments will crash around him AND "his family"? Well, why can't Mueller indict his family NOW? They're not the president, correct? In fact, indicting the family NOW would give law enforcement the opportunity to pressure them and get them to flip on the president, making impeachment all that easier. Yet, you'd like us to believe that Mueller (who by the way doesn't even know what the dossier or Fusion GPS are, but that's another conversation) is sitting on actionable offenses? Huh?????

Impeachment is a political act. The public wasn't ready to back it. Pelosi was quite clear she didn't want to go down that road with no public support. John Q. Public is generally too busy and as a result too misinformed to get behind it. NOW the crimes he has committed are easy to explain and the public has grasped the black and white facts. A recent Fox poll showed over 51% of the country now supports impeachment AND removal. With such public approval Congress will impeach. It will be up to the Senate to grow a spine and a conscience. If they do, Trump will be taken down, followed by a lengthy jail sentence.

[atyclb]

4 minutes ago, Crazy Alex said:

That's a fascinating response.  So what precludes the House from impeaching Trump? If Trump can be indicted after leaving office, then obviously he can be impeached prior to leaving office. In fact, impeachment is the remedy for a prosecutor not being able to indict a sitting president. Surely you understand this, yes? So what's been keeping the House from impeaching if what you allege is true?

 

But honestly, I can see why you're growing weary. Observing basic facts makes your argument crumble under its own weight as it did above.

 

So how about some more scrutiny of what you just posted? Yes, let's do that very thing. You stated Mueller couldn't indict a sitting president. I've already explained to you the folly in your thinking. You also claim that once Trump is out of office, indictments will crash around him AND "his family"? Well, why can't Mueller indict his family NOW? They're not the president, correct? In fact, indicting the family NOW would give law enforcement the opportunity to pressure them and get them to flip on the president, making impeachment all that easier. Yet, you'd like us to believe that Mueller (who by the way doesn't even know what the dossier or Fusion GPS are, but that's another conversation) is sitting on actionable offenses? Huh?????

but crazy alex, you do know even if any of them are found guily the maximum time they could serve is 12 years. as in  your own words that is when the world will end.

[Jingthing]

That's a fascinating response.  So what precludes the House from impeaching Trump? If Trump can be indicted after leaving office, then obviously he can be impeached prior to leaving office. In fact, impeachment is the remedy for a prosecutor not being able to indict a sitting president. Surely you understand this, yes? So what's been keeping the House from impeaching if what you allege is true?
 
But honestly, I can see why you're growing weary. Observing basic facts makes your argument crumble under its own weight as it did above.
 
So how about some more scrutiny of what you just posted? Yes, let's do that very thing. You stated Mueller couldn't indict a sitting president. I've already explained to you the folly in your thinking. You also claim that once Trump is out of office, indictments will crash around him AND "his family"? Well, why can't Mueller indict his family NOW? They're not the president, correct? In fact, indicting the family NOW would give law enforcement the opportunity to pressure them and get them to flip on the president, making impeachment all that easier. Yet, you'd like us to believe that Mueller (who by the way doesn't even know what the dossier or Fusion GPS are, but that's another conversation) is sitting on actionable offenses? Huh?????

I don't recall Mueller saying he had anything to charge against the 45 family.

As far as why not impeach 45 that's a very silly question.

That is happening. The inquiry will be completed and then the house will impeach. That's almost definite. Then it goes to the senate. People seem to think that they know for sure that the senate won't convict but how about we wait and see OK?

Sent from my Lenovo A7020a48 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[Jingthing]

I see nothing different now than I've been reading about for nearly three years. Longer, really. Trump can't win the nomination. Trump can't beat Hillary. Trump won't last a year. Mueller is gonna get Trump. Trump extorted Ukraine.
 
Now... what is the basis for your claim that most Trump supporters know he will be impeached?

Even 45 knows he will be impeached. He's forcing that by obstructing congress. That is not allowed in the American system. He leaves congress no choice. On conviction that's up to the senate republicans. Loyal to their president or loyal to the constitution.

Sent from my Lenovo A7020a48 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[rabas]

8 minutes ago, J Town said:

Impeachment is a political act. The public wasn't ready to back it. Pelosi was quite clear she didn't want to go down that road with no public support. John Q. Public is generally too busy and as a result too misinformed to get behind it. NOW the crimes he has committed are easy to explain and the public has grasped the black and white facts. A recent Fox poll showed over 51% of the country now supports impeachment AND removal. With such public approval Congress will impeach. It will be up to the Senate to grow a spine and a conscience. If they do, Trump will be taken down, followed by a lengthy jail sentence.

"Impeachment is a political act. The public wasn't ready to back it. "

 

The public does not impeach Trump. Nothing about it in the constitution at all. The only way it has anything to do with the public is if the whole thing has been a political kangaroo act from the beginning. Do you ever wonder why congress's approval is always in the teens?  The only thing in the universe Americans agree on.

 

[Crazy Alex]

6 minutes ago, J Town said:

Impeachment is a political act. The public wasn't ready to back it. Pelosi was quite clear she didn't want to go down that road with no public support. John Q. Public is generally too busy and as a result too misinformed to get behind it. NOW the crimes he has committed are easy to explain and the public has grasped the black and white facts. A recent Fox poll showed over 51% of the country now supports impeachment AND removal. With such public approval Congress will impeach. It will be up to the Senate to grow a spine and a conscience. If they do, Trump will be taken down, followed by a lengthy jail sentence.

I'm afraid I have some bad news for you. The poll you cited has been debunked as nonsense, using simple facts, data and math:

 

"Princeton, New Jersey, pollster Braun Research, which conducted the survey, noted 48% of its respondents were Democrats. But the actual breakdown of party-affiliation is 31% Democrat, 29% Republican and 38% independent, according to Gallup."

"A poll weighted for party affiliation would have concluded that 44.9% favored impeachment and 44.4% opposed it, a Post analysis has concluded."

https://nypost.com/2019/10/12/fox-n...misrepresented-impeachment-poll-analysis/amp/

 

Feel free to rebut the logic presented.

[J Town]

7 minutes ago, rabas said:

The public does not impeach Trump. Nothing about it in the constitution at all. The only way it has anything to do with the public is if the whole thing has been a political kangaroo act from the beginning. Do you ever wonder why congress's approval is always in the teens?  The only thing in the universe Americans agree on.

 

No argument there. They're ALL a bunch of crooks, including Pelosi, Mitch McConnell, Lyndsey Graham, etc. They're all scared about maintaining their position of power, politics over country. Trump has just gone too far, using the administration for his own personal gain. He got caught with his hands in the cookie jar, upset too many people, and will now pay for it.

[Crazy Alex]

4 minutes ago, rabas said:

"Impeachment is a political act. The public wasn't ready to back it. "

 

The public does not impeach Trump. Nothing about it in the constitution at all. The only way it has anything to do with the public is if the whole thing has been a political kangaroo act from the beginning. Do you ever wonder why congress's approval is always in the teens?  The only thing in the universe Americans agree on.

 

BAM!!!!

 

This is the problem with liberals' latest ploy to GET TRUMP. In their desperation, they've been reduced to secret hearings and secret witnesses.

[J Town]

5 minutes ago, rabas said:

That's a liberal hit piece copied from the internet, it's everywhere. Every single point has been twisted, greatly exaggerated, manipulated, or is a flat out lie.

 

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/boards/261-politics/77965195

 

That you would blindly copy it, believe it verbatim without seeking the truth is why people complain about liberals being so gullible. It may not be liberals fault, but it is sure a sign of the times. They are also gullible about their political leaders.

 

Deny. I have seen EVERY part of it, it's true. You simply deny the truth.

[Crazy Alex]

3 minutes ago, J Town said:

Deny. I have seen EVERY part of it, it's true. You simply deny the truth.

Opinion is not truth- no matter how hard you want it to be.

[Crazy Alex]

2 minutes ago, J Town said:

I wrote that I copied it from a previous poster. That's what you do. YOU used some references you got from somewhere else about the Fox news poll. That's not plagiarizing, it's referencing facts. Again, you can't argue with facts so you deny and deflect here.

Ah yes, I now see where you kinda sorta admit they're not your words. Fair enough.

 

Now specifically, what facts do you think you've presented? That entire rant is subjective opinion. Not only that, it makes claims about what people think and have said that can't possibly be supported with facts.

 

Now, which of these claims you've made against me can you support?

[J Town]

Just now, rabas said:

 

A technical point. Facts do not equal truth. Facts are constancy being twisted, some left out, wrongly combined, mixed with nonsense to tell almost any lie you can imagine. The most deadly lies are half truths. Truth is what you want.

WOW!!! You, Giuliani and Kelly Conway sipping from the same cup of Koolaid. "Facts do not equal truth?" Alternative facts? Pleeeeeeeze!

[Crazy Alex]

2 minutes ago, rabas said:

 

"That when you heard him proudly brag about his own history of sexual abuse, you said, "No problem.""

 

You saw him sexually abuse someone? You mean in a private conversation he said other women liked him to grab them because he was rich? That's sexual abuse? Would you like to compare that to Clinton’s and Epstein's sexual abuses?

 

I humbly disagree.

 

After looking at that entire screed, I thought oh boo hoo! Who's going to bother with that whole list? Now you've done us the favor of bringing up a specific point: "grab 'em by the pu$$Y". It was obvious from day one Trump meant that figuratively, as in giving them good sex to get them. But let's play their game anyway. "Grab 'em by the pu$$Y" doesn't even mean sexual assault anyway.

 

But now that the genie is out of the bottle, I'll comment on one more: the alleged phony university. First off, anyone who thought Trump University was a real university is stupid beyond all comprehension. Second, there are plenty of real esate "gurus". Like Trump, they all sell actionable information. The problem is, most people STILL won't take action. Thus, they blame their own inaction on the real estate gurus to whom they voluntarily paid for these classes. Trump did what many of us have had to do in life: pay losers to go away. The thing is, the liberals are usually the losers being paid to go away. So of course, they sympathize with the other losers who voluntarily paid for these classes but were too afraid or ___________ to actually take action and do something to improve their lives.

 

 

[metisdead]

A post containing content that was copy and pasted from another site has been removed as well as the replies.  Doesn't matter if it's a Facebook page or a news site, the following applies:

 

14) You will not post any copyrighted material except as fair use laws apply (as in the case of news articles). Please only post a link, the headline and the first three sentences.
 

Other off topic trolling/deflection posts and the replies have been removed. 

[atyclb]

59 minutes ago, Crazy Alex said:

1 hour ago, J Town said:

Deny. I have seen EVERY part of it, it's true. You simply deny the truth.

Opinion is not truth- no matter how hard you want it to be.

nor do facts care about your feelings, to quote someone that didnt vote 4 trump, ben shapiro

[atyclb]

5 minutes ago, atyclb said:

1 hour ago, Crazy Alex said:

1 hour ago, J Town said:

Deny. I have seen EVERY part of it, it's true. You simply deny the truth.

Opinion is not truth- no matter how hard you want it to be.

nor do facts care about your feelings, to quote someone that didnt vote 4 trump, ben shapiro

 

"facts do not care about your feelings" supports the statement "Opinion is not truth- no matter how hard you want it to be."

[Sunderland]

What a time we live in. 

 

The Trump presidency is like a never ending car crash. 

[heybruce]

2 hours ago, Crazy Alex said:

 

You're right, I should have stipulated NADA on Trump. Remember how the Mueller report was supposed to take out Trump? Didn't happen. Then Jerry Nadler began his obsessive witch hunt. NADA. As far as Trump not cooperating with the current Democrat hysterics, I don't blame him. Enough is enough. Now, if you think you've got something with Trump not cooperating, make your move. It's your Democrats who've failed to do anything but posture, huff, puff and BLUFF.

 

I do find your last paragraph interesting. I am under the impression "World News" is about... well, World News. So of course topics will be commented on and revisited. I'm not sure how the allegations you make against me amount to "trollish". But do feel free to debunk anything I post, since you insinuate it is "discredited nonsense".

Mueller investigated Russian interference in the election and possible criminal cooperation with the Trump campaign.  He found lots of Russian interference.  He did not find conclusive proof of criminal cooperation, but made clear that Trump was not exonerated.  He documented obstruction of justice, but stated that it was Justice Department policy to not indict a sitting president.

 

Trolls post biased, fact-free rants that are often outright lies.  Your posts fit that descriptions.  And you are either a newby jumping in with these posts of someone banned for past over the top postings who created a new identity.

[heybruce]

2 hours ago, Crazy Alex said:

That's a fascinating response.  So what precludes the House from impeaching Trump? If Trump can be indicted after leaving office, then obviously he can be impeached prior to leaving office. In fact, impeachment is the remedy for a prosecutor not being able to indict a sitting president. Surely you understand this, yes? So what's been keeping the House from impeaching if what you allege is true?

 

But honestly, I can see why you're growing weary. Observing basic facts makes your argument crumble under its own weight as it did above.

 

So how about some more scrutiny of what you just posted? Yes, let's do that very thing. You stated Mueller couldn't indict a sitting president. I've already explained to you the folly in your thinking. You also claim that once Trump is out of office, indictments will crash around him AND "his family"? Well, why can't Mueller indict his family NOW? They're not the president, correct? In fact, indicting the family NOW would give law enforcement the opportunity to pressure them and get them to flip on the president, making impeachment all that easier. Yet, you'd like us to believe that Mueller (who by the way doesn't even know what the dossier or Fusion GPS are, but that's another conversation) is sitting on actionable offenses? Huh?????

With the Fox Progaganda channel providing non-stop support for Trump, and the Senate Republicans putting re-election ahead of country, the House waited for Trump to do something indefensibly stupid before starting its impeachment inquiry.

 

Regarding Trump's family, Trump is using endless court appeals to protect himself, his family, and his business.  However the appeals will run out.  Be patient.

 

Oh wait, you can't be patient.  You and others have to keep screaming "Make it go away" before the legal process catches up with Trump.

[Crazy Alex]

1 minute ago, heybruce said:

Mueller investigated Russian interference in the election and possible criminal cooperation with the Trump campaign.  He found lots of Russian interference.  He did not find conclusive proof of criminal cooperation, but made clear that Trump was not exonerated.  He documented obstruction of justice, but stated that it was state department policy to not indict a sitting president.

 

Trolls post biased, fact-free rants that are often outright lies.  Your posts fit that descriptions.

Prosecutors don't exonerate people- you know, speaking of FACTS. Furthermore, if Trump obstructed justice, impeachment is the remedy for that. Obviously, the House doesn't think there's enough there there to impeach.

[heybruce]

1 hour ago, Crazy Alex said:

After looking at that entire screed, I thought oh boo hoo! Who's going to bother with that whole list? Now you've done us the favor of bringing up a specific point: "grab 'em by the pu$$Y". It was obvious from day one Trump meant that figuratively, as in giving them good sex to get them. But let's play their game anyway. "Grab 'em by the pu$$Y" doesn't even mean sexual assault anyway.

 

But now that the genie is out of the bottle, I'll comment on one more: the alleged phony university. First off, anyone who thought Trump University was a real university is stupid beyond all comprehension. Second, there are plenty of real esate "gurus". Like Trump, they all sell actionable information. The problem is, most people STILL won't take action. Thus, they blame their own inaction on the real estate gurus to whom they voluntarily paid for these classes. Trump did what many of us have had to do in life: pay losers to go away. The thing is, the liberals are usually the losers being paid to go away. So of course, they sympathize with the other losers who voluntarily paid for these classes but were too afraid or ___________ to actually take action and do something to improve their lives.

 

 

"First off, anyone who thought Trump University was a real university is stupid beyond all comprehension."

 

Correct.  And anyone who thinks Trump is fit to be President is equally stupid.  However a large minority of voters fell for his lies, and are still falling for his lies.

[Crazy Alex]

Just now, heybruce said:

With the Fox Progaganda channel providing non-stop support for Trump, and the Senate Republicans putting re-election ahead of country, the House waited for Trump to do something indefensibly stupid before starting its impeachment inquiry.

 

Regarding Trump's family, Trump is using endless court appeals to protect himself, his family, and his business.  However the appeals will run out.  Be patient.

 

Oh wait, you can't be patient.  You and others have to keep screaming "Make it go away" before the legal process catches up with Trump.

 

 

So Congress' decision whether to impeach is contingent on the actions of one cable news channel that has a small percentage of the TV news audience? That makes no sense whatsoever.

 

As far as "the House waited"... CORRECTION. The House is STILL waiting. There have been endless investigations and hearings with the goal of getting Trump. The only thing that has changed now is the name of the ongoing witch hunt.

 

Now let's get to Trump's family. Contrary to the numerous predictions of Don Jr. and other family members doing the perp walk as a result of the Mueller scam, it hasn't happened. So your assertion about appeals is completely meaningless. That said, if you can articulate how Trump's endless appeals somehow prevent law enforcement from taking action against family members, let's hear it.

 

As far as being patient, I needn't be. There have been several years of desperate ploys to get Trump. You're the people who need to "be patient", not me.

[Crazy Alex]

6 minutes ago, heybruce said:

"First off, anyone who thought Trump University was a real university is stupid beyond all comprehension."

 

Correct.  And anyone who thinks Trump is fit to be President is equally stupid.  However a large minority of voters fell for his lies, and are still falling for his lies.

I'm glad you agree with me. I'm afraid I can't agree with you.