Trump attacks impeachment witness on Twitter, Democrats see intimidation

[metisdead]

An off topic post and a reply has been removed. 

[Skallywag]

4 hours ago, rabas said:

How on Earth can a tweet intimidate a witness who is already sitting in a chamber presenting her testimony? How?

She had to leave the "chamber" eventually. 

I think the commander in chief of the worlds largest military, secret service, etc... can easily intimidate just about anyone with his words. 

POTUS can make anyone's life miserable or difficult if he wanted to (not that it would be legal)

[Chomper Higgot]

4 hours ago, Tippaporn said:

 

You guys never disappoint.  Totally reliable.  And punctual.  I wish my watch worked as well.

 

Can't argue with the information then attack the source.  Same as it ever was.

Can’t argue with the testimony, attack the witness.

[Sujo]

1 minute ago, Skallywag said:

She had to leave the "chamber" eventually. 

I think the commander in chief of the worlds largest military, secret service, etc... can easily intimidate just about anyone with his words. 

POTUS can make anyone's life miserable or difficult if he wanted to (not that it would be legal)

And i think he made her life miserable by smearing her good name when he fired her.

Even repubs in congress thanked her for doing a great job.

[Sujo]

Just now, Chomper Higgot said:

Can’t argue with the testimony, attack the witness.

Bit they dont attack truthful don. The denier of allowing witnesses.

[metisdead]

A troll post and a reply has been removed. 

[Tippaporn]

18 minutes ago, Skallywag said:

She had to leave the "chamber" eventually. 

I think the commander in chief of the worlds largest military, secret service, etc... can easily intimidate just about anyone with his words. 

POTUS can make anyone's life miserable or difficult if he wanted to (not that it would be legal)

Trump didn't threaten her.  His tweet criticized her.  Criticizing and threatening are distinctly different.  If someone claims they feel threatened when no threat exists then what do you call that?  A distortion of reality.  Some folks can't tell the difference.

 

People need to wise up and quit playing the Dem's canard by referring to Trump's tweet as intimidation.  I refuse to call it that.

 

Edited November 17, 2019 by Tippaporn

[Rookiescot]

Its Trump being Trump. He lost a court case in Scotland so suddenly introduced tariffs on Scotch whisky. I know Trump supporters dont like to hear this stuff but its a fact. 

[NightSky]

Trump is a danger to the world..

 

..he's also <deleted> at public speaking..

 

 

 

[Chomper Higgot]

4 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

You, johnny, were not put into this world to have the final say on what is and what is not valid information.  No one came into this world vested with that authority.  It is the strict function of the individual.

Except any individual that disagrees with you.

 

Johnny being just one example.

[Skallywag]

7 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

If someone claims they feel threatened when no threat exists then what do you call that?  A distortion of reality....... referring to Trump's tweet as intimidation.  I refuse to call it that.

More like slander actually, than intimidation, I agree.

“Everywhere Marie Yovanovitch went turned bad,” is part of the tweet in question

If Trump thought that about her, then why wait 2.5 years to replace her?

Trump was responsible for "firing" her in an unusual way, she was told to leave the next day.

Can you imagine working somewhere for 6 years and you have to pack up and leave in less than 24 hours? 

[Tippaporn]

3 minutes ago, Skallywag said:

More like slander actually, than intimidation, I agree.

“Everywhere Marie Yovanovitch went turned bad,” is part of the tweet in question

If Trump thought that about her, then why wait 2.5 years to replace her?

Trump was responsible for "firing" her in an unusual way, she was told to leave the next day.

Can you imagine working somewhere for 6 years and you have to pack up and leave in less than 24 hours? 

My heart bleeds for her.

[sirineou]

3 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

How would you have a problem with people doing what they can to stop corruption?  Are you O.K. with corruption?  Doing anything about it yourself?

Isn't that what the house is doing now? why are you trying to stop it? Are you O.K. with corruption?  Doing anything about it yourself?

[Becker]

30 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

My heart bleeds for her.

Here's a POW from one of the few remaining adults a Fox:

Fox’s Chris Wallace: ‘If You Are Not Moved’ By Marie Yovanovitch, ‘You Don’t Have a Pulse

[stevenl]

1 hour ago, Tippaporn said:

You, johnny, were not put into this world to have the final say on what is and what is not valid information.  No one came into this world vested with that authority.  It is the strict function of the individual.

Exactly, alternative facts are still facts.

[metisdead]

Troll posts and replies have been removed.

 

Posts bickering about sources have been removed as the topic is not about sources. 

[Sujo]

25 minutes ago, hyku1147 said:

History shows us that hysteria* is a very dangerous, and highly contagious, emotional disturbance/psychiatric condition. Many Dem's - including Yovanovitch -  are exhibiting -  "selective amnesia, shallow volatile emotions, and over-dramatic or attention-seeking behavior."

 

It is telling that there is no Trump hysteria, yet the Anti-Trump plague has spread across both North America, and Europe, like the Black Death. The carrier being pseudo journalism.

 

* hys·te·ri·a

 

noun: hysteria; plural noun: hysterias

1. exaggerated or uncontrollable emotion or excitement, especially among a group of people.

   "the mass hysteria that characterizes the week before Christmas"

    

   Psychiatry

   A psychological disorder (not now regarded as a single definite condition) whose symptoms include conversion of psychological stress into physical symptoms (somatization), selective amnesia, shallow volatile emotions, and overdramatic or attention-seeking behavior...

 

Trump certainly seems to suffer from that.

[JHolmesJr]

1 hour ago, NightSky said:

Trump is a danger to the world..

 

..he's also <deleted> at public speaking..

 

 

 

I agree Trump doesn't have Obama's silky and polished rhetoric...obama is a trained lawyer.

 

But Trump draws his power from cutting through all the BS and saying it like it is.

 

Theres a huge demand for it these days...it's called authenticity. The only downside to it

is you don't always choreograph your words... and Trump has said things that have sounded

unpolished.

 

Have you seen Obama talk without a teleprompter...he sounds terrible.

 

 

[Jingthing]

6 minutes ago, Sujo said:

Trump certainly seems to suffer from that.

Watch his rallies if you want to see hysteria. They're scary. Reminiscent of other very dark times in history. 

[stevenl]

1 minute ago, JHolmesJr said:

I agree Trump doesn't have Obama's silky and polished rhetoric...obama is a trained lawyer.

 

But Trump draws his power from cutting through all the BS and saying it like it is.

 

Theres a huge demand for it these days...it's called authenticity. The only downside to it

is you don't always choreograph your words... and Trump has said things that have sounded

unpolished.

 

Have you seen Obama talk without a teleprompter...he sounds terrible.

 

 

Saying it like it is, more than 13,000 lies so far.

[bristolboy]

1 minute ago, JHolmesJr said:

But Trump draws his power from cutting through all the BS and saying it like it is.

 

 

 

What's he up to now? 13000 or so lies and distortions?

[bristolboy]

4 minutes ago, JHolmesJr said:

I agree Trump doesn't have Obama's silky and polished rhetoric...obama is a trained lawyer.

 

But Trump draws his power from cutting through all the BS and saying it like it is.

 

Theres a huge demand for it these days...it's called authenticity. The only downside to it

is you don't always choreograph your words... and Trump has said things that have sounded

unpolished.

 

Have you seen Obama talk without a teleprompter...he sounds terrible.

 

 

Time to bring out the definition of "truthiness".

Truthiness is the belief or assertion that a particular statement is true based on the intuition or perceptions of some individual or individuals, without regard to evidence, logic, intellectual examination, or facts.^[1][2] Truthiness can range from ignorant assertions of falsehoods to deliberate duplicity or propaganda intended to sway opinions.^[3][4]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truthiness

Edited November 17, 2019 by bristolboy

[JHolmesJr]

2 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

Time to bring out the definition of "truthiness".

Truthiness is the belief or assertion that a particular statement is true based on the intuition or perceptions of some individual or individuals, without regard to evidence, logic, intellectual examination, or facts.^[1][2] Truthiness can range from ignorant assertions of falsehoods to deliberate duplicity or propaganda intended to sway opinions.^[3][4]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truthiness

 

I suppose that's what you would call any Dem's belief that they could beat trump in 2020.

 

Truthiness. ????

 

[bristolboy]

2 minutes ago, JHolmesJr said:

 

I suppose that's what you would call any Dem's belief that they could beat trump in 2020.

 

Truthiness. ????

 

Do I really have to walk you through the definition to explain why what you've just asserted is nonsense?

[JHolmesJr]

2 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

Do I really have to walk you through the definition to explain why what you've just asserted is nonsense?

 

Yes. ????

[bristolboy]

Just now, JHolmesJr said:

 

Yes. ????

Because the future is not a fact. So it's no more a case of truthiness for someone to have believed that Hillary Clinton would win that it is for someone to believe that a  football team that is favored to win loses instead.

[NightSky]

37 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

Do I really have to walk you through the definition to explain why what you've just asserted is nonsense?

 

35 minutes ago, JHolmesJr said:

 

Yes. ????

Say no more, you're definitely one of those who trump relies on

[EVENKEEL]

On 11/15/2019 at 5:56 PM, Chomper Higgot said:

It’s not over, and there’s much more to come.

You're correct, it will never end till Mr. Trump finishes his second term.

[rabas]

1 hour ago, bristolboy said:

Because the future is not a fact. So it's no more a case of truthiness for someone to have believed that Hillary Clinton would win that it is for someone to believe that a  football team that is favored to win loses instead.

But the future is real. It can be determined, given sufficient information, to a degree limited only by the Uncertainty Principle.

 

Thus after 2 days of Trump impeachment farce his future re-election has now become fact and so JHolmes use of truthinees is now correct.

[wayned]

46 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

But on the other hand. Rasmussen does show give him a 1 point edge in popularity.

 

He might have a point edge in the polls but IMHO it's totally due to his popularity as he continues to dominate the news cycle be it good or bad, mostly bad. Trump is on a person's mind and when asked whether it's Trump or Biden they say Trump!  Then they ask "what was the question:?