Must Read In historic moment, U.S. House impeaches Donald Trump for abuse of power

[WalkingOrders]

32 minutes ago, wwest5829 said:

Ha! No, because the leader of the senate and Sen. Graham (R) bothe stated in their own words that they are not impartial.

I am of the belief that Graham, McConnell, et al, and all the Senators of both parties are all already very aware of the evidence, as they see it.

[metisdead]

Some offensive posts and replies have been removed. 

[Waterloo]

10 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Unless he is convicted by the senate it's of no more consequence than Clinton's. Who even remembers that Clinton was impeached, and it doesn't make the slightest difference as to how he is remembered.

However, enjoy your moment of triumph, till the senate probably acquits him next year. I only say probably, because it's life, and sometimes life deals us the unexpected, but I'm 97% sure he'll be acquitted.

Nothing to fear.

Your Joking aren't you?

DT is never going to forget this slight from the ungrateful unwashed sorry his respected voters all hail the king.

This stable genius can't even stop himself trolling a sixteen year old for getting on the cover of Time Magazine.

 

Whilst the outcome in the Senate looks highly predicable, I would not discount the loose canon that is Donald's total lack of any impulse control.

If you think his tweeting has been wild and reckless so far wait till the trial actually starts.

 

5555

[Muzarella]

Corruption will prevail! Trump will be re-elected.

[jany123]

37 minutes ago, TopDeadSenter said:

It would have been nice to have just one piece of hard evidence. The 2nd and third hand hearsay, presumptions and bizarre speculatory testimony by pouting neverTrumpers is unfortunately not sufficient. This is why Nancy is trying to shelve it before any more brown stuff hits the fan for the dems.

Shelve it? Earlier this week the talk was about the ongoing investigations into its criminal conduct.... continuing to investigate is hardly shelving anything

 

Meanwhile, suggesting that the testimony given thus far is bizarre is pretty pathetic. However....  Republican refusal to comply with lawful subpoenas in a nation you think great and Democratic is something that can be deemed to be bizarre.

 

 

[WalkingOrders]

6 minutes ago, jany123 said:

Republican refusal to comply with lawful subpoenas

It would be the Court that determines if the subpoenas were lawful. This has always been the way it works. Nothing new here. The Democrats chose not to contest in the courts. That is their decision, and their decision alone. One does not have to take a side to simply admit to this as fact. If it were the other way around, and it were Democrats being served with Subpoenas I recognize that they have a right to contest in the courts. That is the way it works. These are issues about power being fought over between the branches of Government, again, nothing new.

[elmrfudd]

11 hours ago, Jingthing said:

The actual charges are just the tip of the iceberg of this President's impeachable offenses. The house did the right thing. The fact that the senate is gearing up to do the wrong thing didn't and shouldn't have influenced the house. As far as long term political impact regardless of any premature crowing or bravado nobody yet can possibly know. 

Really? If the "evidence" is so overwhelming strong as these twits say then why delay sending them to the senate? 

 

This will be a hilarious backfire and result in a reelected president who you and the other leftists hate with raw emotion and irrational outrage in every reaction. 

 

The irony is fantastic. 

[Jingthing]

13 minutes ago, elmrfudd said:

Really? If the "evidence" is so overwhelming strong as these twits say then why delay sending them to the senate? 

 

This will be a hilarious backfire and result in a reelected president who you and the other leftists hate with raw emotion and irrational outrage in every reaction. 

 

The irony is fantastic. 

Enough already with the premature gloating. I see no value in engaging with such juvenile rhetoric (twits? really?) -- so, goodbye.

[WalkingOrders]

6 minutes ago, jany123 said:

1 hour ago, WalkingOrders said:

There are no incontrovertable facts that the Russians changed the balance of this election for Donald Trump. None.

Which has nothing to do with the impeachment, beyond that king don obstructed an investigation into the subject.

I was responding to the claim that Russians changed the balance of the election made in an earlier post using the same words the poster used "incontrovertable facts". I say that is were not incontrovertable facts. I never made any claims abut it having to do with impeachment. I will now, however, as it is rather difficult for conservatives to not view this impeachment in light of the fact that Democrats have been trying to impeach the President since he took office. There was no obstruction. If there was then the Democrats would have brought that charge in as part of this impeachment, or earlier attempt. They did not.

[WalkingOrders]

10 minutes ago, jany123 said:

Really? Read mueller report.

The Mueller report mearly lays out his reasoning of what might be the legal basis for obstruction, however Mueller made no such charge of obstruction. The Democrats for quite some time argued that the reason that Mueller made no such charge was that he was leaving it for the Congress to make the charges based upon the legal basis provided by the Mueller report. The Democrats brought no such charge. Case closed.

[Cory1848]

1 hour ago, WalkingOrders said:

[...] a story about the President paying prostitutes to urinate for him on a bed previously used by the former President and First lady. This bothers me greatly.

Funny that you should mention this -- because of all the corruption Trump has been involved in throughout his pathetic life and into his presidency, this is the one thing that really doesn’t bother me in the least. Not saying that he did it, but, you know, the story’s out there, isn’t it. I mean, we all have little fetishes, and I’m not saying that getting peed on is one of mine, but I wouldn’t blame a chap for it. As long as the sex workers are not underage, and no one gets hurt or is forced to do something she doesn’t want to do, and as long as they are adequately compensated for their services and the facilities are properly cleaned up for the next guests, what’s the harm in it? Again, not saying that Trump did this, but a lot of people are talking that he did, and I don’t blame him a bit if it’s true.

[mogandave]

12 minutes ago, jany123 said:

Really? Read mueller report.

Yeah, I read it. As did House Democrats and they chose not to use it, because it does not prove Trump did anything criminal. 
 

In any event, you were referring to the impeachment, which was about things that occurred after the Mueller report, yes? 
 

If you don’t know, just say you don’t know, no shame in that, but pretending you know, well that’s a little different. 

[balo]

That man is poison to the world. Please stop him before it's too late, 

Edited December 19, 2019 by balo

[Jingthing]

2 minutes ago, balo said:

That man is poison to the world. Please stop him before it's too late, 

Well impeachment won't remove him because the 45 cult of personality and the republican party are now merged as one. Tragically his reelection though hardly a certainly is totally possible and in some ways arguably approaching probable. But too early to make definite predictions.  

Edited December 19, 2019 by Jingthing

[WalkingOrders]

31 minutes ago, Cory1848 said:

Not saying that he did it, but, you know, the story’s out there, isn’t it. I mean, we all have little fetishes, and I’m not saying that getting peed on is one of mine, but I wouldn’t blame a chap for it. As long as the sex workers are not underage, and no one gets hurt or is forced to do something she doesn’t want to do, and as long as they are adequately compensated for their services and the facilities are properly cleaned up for the next guests, what’s the harm in it? Again, not saying that Trump did this, but a lot of people are talking that he did, and I don’t blame him a bit if it’s true.

I recommend that you read the FBI IG dated 12092019. There you will find the truth about this subject. The story is not true.  It can be found online here. Link opens as PDF direct for United States Department of Justice website: https://www.justice.gov/storage/120919-examination.pdf

[jany123]

36 minutes ago, WalkingOrders said:

The Mueller report mearly lays out his reasoning of what might be the legal basis for obstruction, however Mueller made no such charge of obstruction. The Democrats for quite some time argued that the reason that Mueller made no such charge was that he was leaving it for the Congress to make the charges based upon the legal basis provided by the Mueller report. The Democrats brought no such charge. Case closed.

You asked how the trump committed obstruction of justice. Mueller reasoning does explain that. Mueller did not charge the trump because, as a justice department figure, that would violate the rules he was restricted too. Common knowledge.

 

Mueller did made it clear that congress, not him, could impeach. That’s that.

 

But why wasn’t this done? Well it has been made clear that the dems did not want what was determined to be a “scattergun” approach to impeachment, so they acted only on the Ukraine scandal, to streamline and simplify. Common knowledge.

 

this may have been a bad approach... who knows... but it was the approach taken, and trying to distort that is disingenuous. 

[WalkingOrders]

21 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Well impeachment won't remove him because the 45 cult of personality and the republican party are now merged as one. Tragically his reelection though hardly a certainly is totally possible and in some ways arguably approaching probable. But too early to make definite predictions.  

I ask that you refrain from calling people who support the President as members of a Cult. I follow only God, but support the President of the United States. I am a conservative. I follow a basket of policies and principles, and choose candidates who best are in line with my thinking in regard that basket. The Republican Party , minus the Neo-conservative wing seems best for me in that regard.  Again, I am not a cult member, voting conservative is nothing new for me. 

[Sujo]

19 minutes ago, WalkingOrders said:

I ask that you refrain from calling people who support the President as members of a Cult. I follow only God, but support the President of the United States. I am a conservative. I follow a basket of policies and principles, and choose candidates who best are in line with my thinking in regard that basket. The Republican Party , minus the Neo-conservative wing seems best for me in that regard.  Again, I am not a cult member, voting conservative is nothing new for me. 

His followers do possess cult attributes. If the shoe fits.

 

They lie, then when given facts continue to repeat lies.

 

They refuse to acknowledge evidence and just say its fake news. They dont care what he does, they blindly follow regardless of the facts and evidence and will rely on alternative facts.

 

A cult indeed.

[mogandave]

18 minutes ago, jany123 said:

You asked how the trump committed obstruction of justice. Mueller reasoning does explain that. Mueller did not charge the trump because, as a justice department figure, that would violate the rules he was restricted too. Common knowledge.

 

Mueller did made it clear that congress, not him, could impeach. That’s that.

 

But why wasn’t this done? Well it has been made clear that the dems did not want what was determined to be a “scattergun” approach to impeachment, so they acted only on the Ukraine scandal, to streamline and simplify. Common knowledge.

 

this may have been a bad approach... who knows... but it was the approach taken, and trying to distort that is disingenuous. 

So rather than impeaching him a year ago for the crimes proven in the Mueller report, they waited for a “whistle blower” to come forward and conspire with Adam Schiff to generate new charges that don’t include a crime. 
 

That makes sense, thanks. 
 

Oh, and I’m sorry, I did misread your post. You were referring to the the obstruction in the Russia collision hoax, not the phony obstruction charge in the Ukraine phone call impeachment.
 

Again, my apologies. 

[WalkingOrders]

 

[elmrfudd]

1 hour ago, balo said:

That man is poison to the world. Please stop him before it's too late, 

No, you don't like him. It stops there... For another 5 years 

[Chomper Higgot]

53 minutes ago, WalkingOrders said:

I ask that you refrain from calling people who support the President as members of a Cult. I follow only God, but support the President of the United States. I am a conservative. I follow a basket of policies and principles, and choose candidates who best are in line with my thinking in regard that basket. The Republican Party , minus the Neo-conservative wing seems best for me in that regard.  Again, I am not a cult member, voting conservative is nothing new for me. 

Having brought your faith into the discussion, please explain how you square your faith with support for Trump, a liar, an adulterer a blasphemer?

[WalkingOrders]

1 minute ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Having brought your faith into the discussion, please explain how you square your faith with support for Trump, a liar, an adulterer a blasphemer?

My faith is in this discussion as part of a request that I not be called a cult member which is in and of itself an insult on people of faith by claiming that they follow Donald Trump as a God. It is out of line that I should be asked to defend my faith any further here. One more time despite posts that insult I ask that calling people who decide to vote conservative cult members is wrong. Please do not insult any further. Thank you

[Cryingdick]

One thing I noticed about the impeachment is. How badly the government handles anything it does. They took months of boring testimony and interviews, had to debate an obvious outcome hour after hour the day of impeachment. When it came time to vote you can see timers and on both occasions the timer ran out. 

 

Why could they not have simply voted for each article at the same time? Nobody told them about how to make single file lines to go quickly? They aren't as efficient as a second grade civics class. Now Pelosi may not even forward the articles to the senate.

 

This is why I do not want the government to control things such as health care. They can't even stage a mock impeachment properly.

 

The fun part was Pelosi staring down the dems when they started clapping. Let's keep it solemn and prayerful folks. Because we have no joy in doing this.

 

They had been dangling on the edge for awhile but now it is clear they have stepped off the stupid cliff with both feet.

 

It's odd because I am not outraged the outcome was great they showed what a huge failure the DFl is in it's current state. Even JT is thinking Trump's re-election is probable.

 

This will be remembered as the day the music died for the dems.

 

https://nypost.com/2019/12/18/nancy-pelosis-stomach-turning-impeachment-charade-damages-america-goodwin/

 

 

[WalkingOrders]

That this has degenerated into claims that people who vote conservatives are cult followers is nothing more then insult. To then imply that voting for Donald Trump is a form of blasphemy or other sin is likewise wrong. Like it is wrong to then ask for theological discussion on why I chose the lessor of two evils in my mind. Which by the way politics always is. I am not going to move policy by policy to defend my faith, or my voting record. If anyone here would like to debate issues I am more then happy to do so as it relates to the topic here.

[Cryingdick]

Pelosi about to speak. Let's see what completely convoluted, incoherent, warped direction she wants to take now....

[Cory1848]

1 hour ago, WalkingOrders said:

I recommend that you read the FBI IG dated 12092019. There you will find the truth about this subject. The story is not true.  It can be found online here. Link opens as PDF direct for United States Department of Justice website: https://www.justice.gov/storage/120919-examination.pdf

Sorry man, I'm not going to read the report. My post was pure sarcasm; I could care less about the golden shower story. But I did deploy Trump's tactic of telling a bald lie, saying that "people are talking about it!," and watching the lie get shared a billion times in social media, where his fans lap it up.

[Jingthing]

1 hour ago, Sujo said:

His followers do possess cult attributes. If the shoe fits.

 

They lie, then when given facts continue to repeat lies.

 

They refuse to acknowledge evidence and just say its fake news. They dont care what he does, they blindly follow regardless of the facts and evidence and will rely on alternative facts.

 

A cult indeed.

Yes the shoe fits. The 45 political movement is definitely a cult of personality. It's important to know that from a historical perspective as his cult of personality can be seen in the context of others both currently and throughout human history. Current other examples include Putin and Erdogan. 

 

For anyone that is unaware of this characterization of the 45 movement, I can assure you this is definitely a thing and has been actively discussed by academics and journalists even before he was elected. For those that want to explore this simply google the president's name and cult of personality and you will find a wealth of interesting information. I think it would be much harder to find many people arguing that his movement is NOT a cult of personality!

 

"This is a list of regimes of countries or individual leaders around the world which have been discussed in the media or academia as having created a cult of personality. A cult of personality uses various techniques, including mass media, propaganda, the arts, patriotism, and government-organized demonstrations and rallies to create a heroic image, of a leader, often inviting worshipful behavior through uncritical flattery and praise."

 

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cults_of_personality

 

 

 

Edited December 19, 2019 by Jingthing

[WalkingOrders]

"The moment the framers feared has arrived. A political faction in the lower chamber have succumbed to partisan rage" - Senator Mitch McConnell, United States Senate Floor.

[jany123]

1 hour ago, mogandave said:

So rather than impeaching him a year ago for the crimes proven in the Mueller report, they waited for a “whistle blower” to come forward and conspire with Adam Schiff to generate new charges that don’t include a crime. 
 

That makes sense, thanks. 

Have you ever heard of the expression relating to giving someone enough rope to hang himself?

 

Anyway and once again.... nancy was against impeachment and managed to frustrate democrat endeavors for as long as she could... but the trump just couldn’t stop peeing in his nest, just like a gannet.... and she finally had to acknowledge this and start the process.... you  know this to be true.

 

i would ask that you not insult our intelligence, but I think your actually insulting your own intelligence

 

Edited December 19, 2019 by jany123